Thanks very much for the kind words. I really appreciate that. I'm very
happy with the way that it has turned out.
Damon
On Wednesday, July 1, 2020 at 11:52:11 PM UTC-7, TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>
> Ciao Damon
>
> I followed this thread with interest. I've commented several times on past
> on issues in presenting genealogical trees (I'm an anthropologist).
>
> My first comment is you are doing really well with this! Actually managing
> to depict trees that include spouses.
>
> The idea to use a "pedigree" tree is I think the *right choice* for the
> extant tools! Pedigree trees being ones with all children sharing a common
> "blood" ancestor.
>
> Technically speaking your tree depicts a form of "ambilineal" descent,
> where ...
>
> - sons AND daughters can both be counted in descent (cosanguines)
> - spouses (not part of descent) are recorded at point of marriage
> (affinity), but then fall away, not being part of the "pedigree".
>
> This makes your approach compatible with Western kinship systems (which
> are bilateral) and gives understandable charts.
> I mean, charts without any reference to spouses are not really Western
> kinship (I.e. just matrinlineal or patrilineal descent, not bilateral).
>
> The one technical thing I know is that the "list" approach (I.e The
> fundamental structure of final HTML <li> s that do the presentation) as far
> as I can seen *can only possibly depict lineal descent*.
>
> But you managed to (1) add spouses (affines) at branch level in a way that
> can work and makes the outcome viable as a real chart; (2) that is
> compatible with bilateral descent.
>
> Just FYI there have been several discussions of possible ways to code
> genealogical charts in this group. Let me know if you'd like me to find
> them for you.
> That said, basically, in terms of outcome, you are hitting the nail on the
> head elegantly!
>
> I would love to see your finished wiki, if, when done, you are willing to
> share it.
>
> Very best wishes
> TT
>
>
> On Thursday, 2 July 2020 00:13:30 UTC+2, Damon Pritchett wrote:
>>
>> So my first task in changing over to fields was to get Tidgraph to work
>> with a father field and a mother field. I spent a couple of hours on this
>> trying to get Tidgraph to show the parents, but I was unable to do so. The
>> only way that I have been able to get Tidgraph to do what I wanted was to
>> have a parents field and the father and mother separated by a semicolon. I
>> could then use a filter as the mode in Tidgraph to separate the two. I
>> really didn't care for this approach. For the time being, I'm sticking with
>> the tags approach until I can figure out either a way to get Tidgraph to do
>> what I'm looking to do or use Tony's suggestion of a CSS approach.
>>
>> On Saturday, June 27, 2020 at 4:27:54 PM UTC-7, Damon Pritchett wrote:
>>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> I've spent the last few days working on a new wiki for use with my
>>> family history. I'm going to use it, not as a substitute for my genealogy
>>> program, but as a supplement to keep track of documentation and such. In so
>>> doing, I've managed to figure out a nice way of using tidgraph to generate
>>> my pedigree chart and I've written a "children of" using nested list
>>> widgets. I have tiddlers for each person with that person's parents as
>>> tags. With tidgraph, I was able to get the desired behavior by using
>>> mode="tags[]" instead of tagging which is the default. Tidgraph is a
>>> wonderful plugin and it's too bad that it doesn't seem to be supported any
>>> longer. I'm still learning Javascript, so am a long way from making any
>>> changes to it myself.
>>>
>>> I've created a ViewTemplate that I've included here:
>>> \import [title<currentTiddler>]
>>>
>>> <$list filter="[all[current]search:description[People]]">
>>>
>>> <div class="tc-tiddler-body" style="border: none;">
>>>
>>>
>>> <$tidgraph start=<<currentTiddler>> mode="tags[]sort[sex]reverse[]"
>>> maxdepth="2" nocollapse />
>>>
>>> <$list filter="[all[current]has:field[birth]]
>>> [all[current]has:field[death]]">
>>> <table class="highlight1">
>>> <caption style="text-align: left; font-weight: bold; caption-side:
>>> top;">Birth / Death:</caption>
>>> <tr>
>>> <td>Birth</td>
>>> <td><$macrocall $name="date-str" date={{!!birth}}/></td>
>>> <td><<birthplace>></td>
>>> </tr>
>>> <tr>
>>> <td>Death</td>
>>> <td><$macrocall $name="date-str" date={{!!death}}/></td>
>>> <td><<deathplace>></td>
>>> </tr>
>>> </table>
>>> </$list>
>>>
>>> <$list filter="[all[current]]" variable="Parent">
>>>
>>> <$list
>>> filter="[all[current]tagging[]search:description[People]limit[1]]"
>>> variable=null>
>>>
>>> <div class="list-tree">
>>> Children of <<currentTiddler>>:
>>> <ol>
>>> <$list
>>> filter="[title<currentTiddler>tagging[]sortan[birth]tags[]!title<Parent>]">
>>> <li>with: <$link><$view field='caption'><$view
>>> field='title'/></$view></$link>
>>> <$list
>>> filter="[title<currentTiddler>tagging[]limit[1]has[parents-marriage]]">
>>> -> married: <$macrocall $name="date-str"
>>> date={{!!parents-marriage}}/>
>>> </$list>
>>> <ol>
>>> <$list filter="[title<currentTiddler>tagging[]sortan[birth]]">
>>> <li><$link><$view field='caption'><$view
>>> field='title'/></$view></$link> -> born: <$macrocall $name="date-str"
>>> date={{!!birth}}/></li>
>>> </$list>
>>> </ol>
>>> </li>
>>> </$list>
>>> </ol>
>>> </div>
>>>
>>> </$list>
>>>
>>> </$list>
>>>
>>> <$list
>>> filter="[all[current]backlinks[]!search:description[People]!is[missing]limit[1]]"
>>>
>>> variable=null>
>>>
>>> <<table-dynamic
>>> filter:"[title<currentTiddler>backlinks[]!search:description[People]]"
>>> fields:"tbl-expand record-date description title" sortOp:sortan
>>> stateTiddler:"recordsearch" class:"highlight1" editButton:no
>>> caption:"''Mentioned or connected with the following records:''">>
>>>
>>> </$list>
>>>
>>>
>>> </div>
>>>
>>> </$list>
>>>
>>>
>>> The result is this:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm suing the class "list-tree" which has been around for quite a while
>>> and created by Mat. There's also a dynamic table called out from the Shiraz
>>> plugin that I use to show any documents that the person is listed in.
>>>
>>> This all works just how I want it to work, but being that my skills at
>>> Tiddlywiki are still forming, I'm wondering if there might be a more
>>> efficient or effective way of doing the same thing. I am definitely open to
>>> any better ways of doing things.
>>>
>>> I'm also thinking of expanding the "children of" code to a recursive
>>> macro to get multiple generations, but I don't know exactly how to proceed
>>> down that path. Any suggestions would be highly appreciated.
>>>
>>> Feel free to use this code if you think you'd find it useful. I only ask
>>> that, if you make any improvements or additions, that you let me know so I
>>> might incorporate those.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Damon
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
--
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/c8019800-4e6c-41ba-b3be-d81dede9f92fo%40googlegroups.com.
