Ahh, Yes what led to them?
Regards Tony On Monday, June 29, 2020 at 2:08:29 PM UTC+10, Damon Pritchett wrote: > > Thanks Tony. Interesting thoughts. By pedigree I mean the first figure > that Tidgraph generated. It’s a chart that shows the ancestors of a person > graphically. > > > > On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 9:05 PM TW Tones <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> Damon, >> >> I am afraid I am not sure what you mean by pedigree. >> >> Look at my recent post Jumping into streams >> <https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/tiddlywiki/VxXNkf92k4A> it >> includes a simple TOC via recursive code, I expect if you come to >> understand that you should be able to handle your recursive processes. A >> Little more complex is the existing toc macros $:/core/macros/toc, in part >> because they protect you from becoming your own grandfather, but they >> involve a single parent tree by tag. >> >> Tidgraph is simple in someways, so I believe it could be rebuilt by other >> means. Particularly a css based way to represent any list like tiddgraph. >> After all a nested button list is basically the same thing without the >> lines. Not that I know CSS enough, others do. >> >> Regards >> Tony >> >> >> >> >> On Monday, June 29, 2020 at 12:55:15 PM UTC+10, Damon Pritchett wrote: >>> >>> Thanks Tony. I really do appreciate your insight. I will be the first to >>> admit that I have a lot to learn. >>> >>> I actually started this little project using a separate field for mother >>> and father, but I switched to tags because it was easier to make it work >>> with Tidgraph. I couldn’t quite figure out how to make it use only those >>> two fields and not the others (birth, death, etc.) I did make it work with >>> a parents field with the mother and father separated by a “;” bit I really >>> didn’t like that for obvious reasons. Tidgraph worked well with the two >>> tags because I could specify mode=“tags[]” and all was well since they were >>> the only tags I intended to use. Using fields[] instead would have listed >>> all fields and stopped there. Tidgraph is the easiest way to generate a >>> pedigree chart. >>> >>> Once I got that, then I went to work on the “children of” list. Since I >>> already went down the tag path, I stuck with it. Generating a descendant >>> list was easy with the toc macros, but they couldn’t include the spouses so >>> I rolled my own. I will not claim it is the best approach. Just easiest at >>> the time and it served my purpose. I wasn’t looking to replace my >>> genealogy program; just provide a quick snapshot for reference. >>> >>> Having said all of that, I’m definitely open to ideas and look forward >>> to seeing your ideas and TT’s as well. >>> >>> Now a question. If I were to go back to mother and father fields, how >>> could I get similar looking results for both pedigree and children? That’s >>> where I got stuck in the first place. >>> >>> Damon >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 7:29 PM TW Tones <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Damon, >>>> >>>> The reason I suggested against tags is you then have to differentiate >>>> between tags. On the surface there is no immediate difference between a >>>> mother or father-name tag. This can be solved, but if a person had a >>>> mother >>>> and father field, it would be unambiguous. With TOCP you can use other >>>> fields. What if you wanted to add a clan tag?, this would also need >>>> checking. >>>> >>>> However genealogy can get seriously complex, Lets see if TT/Josiah >>>> takes the bait and shares some of his resources so far. >>>> >>>> I do intend to provide the tools one day for a full and sophisticated >>>> genealogical tree, consider step children, second spouse, birth date and >>>> multiple marriages and death. What is the implication of twins and and >>>> multiple birth?, well in my family tree it allowed us to to identify a >>>> whole tree of relatives even although the father was unknown. Multiple >>>> births are an example of proven FULL siblings. >>>> >>>> However it will take some time, because I am collecting the mechanisms >>>> to make it highly extensible and support other networks and hierarchies as >>>> well. >>>> >>>> Needless to say it will use tocp, Kin, and recursion and possible >>>> GenTags. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Tony >>>> >>>> >>>> On Monday, June 29, 2020 at 10:48:04 AM UTC+10, Damon Pritchett wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hey Tony, >>>>> >>>>> I have done quite a bit of searching and, at least so far, I have >>>>> found no solutions to the problem I was trying to address, just comments >>>>> on >>>>> how difficult the problem is when there are bi-lineal relationships. >>>>> >>>>> I may not have put enough explanation in my initial post. What I might >>>>> not be making clear (see "children of" picture) is that Person 1 is, say, >>>>> the father and Persons 2 & 3 are the mothers. Persons 4 and 5 have the >>>>> same >>>>> "father," but not the same mother. That's why I have the word "with" >>>>> before >>>>> the names. >>>>> >>>>> I played with Kin filter to replicate what I had and couldn't quite >>>>> get there. I came close, but couldn't get past the "flatness" of the >>>>> lists >>>>> generated by the kin filter Maybe I gave up too soon, but since I had a >>>>> solution that worked, I didn't want to spend any further time on it. >>>>> >>>>> I've used the TOCP plugin a lot in my wikis and love it. At this >>>>> point, I don't see the problem changing whether I use fields or tags, but >>>>> I >>>>> could be wrong. I used tags for this because of the operators tags and >>>>> tagging which made things relatively easy. >>>>> >>>>> Damon >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sunday, June 28, 2020 at 5:02:02 PM UTC-7, TW Tones wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Damon, >>>>>> >>>>>> One way to use the kin filter is to use one kin filter and add or >>>>>> subtract the titles from another kin filter. so you could subtract your >>>>>> family (your parents below) from that below your grandparents family the >>>>>> result will be you aunts uncles cousins etc.. >>>>>> >>>>>> If using tags to indicate parentage you have to check the the parent >>>>>> to determine if they are father or mother, to to make sure the tags is >>>>>> not >>>>>> for something else. I suggest moving relationships into fields not tags >>>>>> (If >>>>>> you had not already). >>>>>> >>>>>> Also the TOCP plugin or a variation along with the kin filter >>>>>> operating on fields rather than tags is possibly the way to go building >>>>>> a >>>>>> genealogical tree. Do Search the forum, TT and others have done a lot of >>>>>> genealogical work with Tiddlywiki. >>>>>> >>>>>> You will find in the forums recursive toc and macros discussed a few >>>>>> times that could help you build a full system that iterates trees. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> Tony >>>>>> >>>>>> On Monday, June 29, 2020 at 6:14:02 AM UTC+10, Damon Pritchett wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've played around with the kin filter today and it is a fine >>>>>>> replacement for part of what I wrote. However, (see the Person 1 >>>>>>> picture >>>>>>> for reference) to show the children of Person one along with the >>>>>>> spouse/partner who was the other parent of the given child, takes the >>>>>>> additional steps that I took in my code. The Kin filter cannot do this >>>>>>> by >>>>>>> itself. The Kin filter will list all of the descendants for Person 1, >>>>>>> but >>>>>>> that list is a flat list and has no hierarchy to it and will not list >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> spouses because they are not direct descendants (at least, I haven't >>>>>>> been >>>>>>> able to figure out how to do it). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Damon >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Saturday, June 27, 2020 at 9:47:48 PM UTC-7, Damon Pritchett >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Saq, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have used it before and it just never occurred to me to use it in >>>>>>>> this aspect. Thanks for the reminder. I will look into that tomorrow. >>>>>>>> What >>>>>>>> I did was a great learning experience for me but kin filter will >>>>>>>> likely >>>>>>>> work better. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >>>> Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/tiddlywiki/ckbmFxV4gRk/unsubscribe. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >>>> [email protected]. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/c8fdd6bd-972a-46d3-bcd8-0cbd3f429e21o%40googlegroups.com >>>> >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/c8fdd6bd-972a-46d3-bcd8-0cbd3f429e21o%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/tiddlywiki/ckbmFxV4gRk/unsubscribe. >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >> [email protected] <javascript:>. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/f3112f86-582c-4989-8d04-f8443040752co%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/f3112f86-582c-4989-8d04-f8443040752co%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/4fcfa5c2-2554-47e7-b699-0a5b29ebd7bfo%40googlegroups.com.
