* Grumble - Gender requirement

Questions regarding use of any Version of Family Historian. Please ensure you have set your Version of Family Historian in your Profile. If your question fits in one of these subject-specific sub-forums, please ask it there.
Post Reply
avatar
E Wilcock
Megastar
Posts: 1181
Joined: 11 Oct 2014 07:59
Family Historian: V7
Location: London
Contact:

Grumble - Gender requirement

Post by E Wilcock »

Looking through an archive catalogue I note that the author I am pursuing had a male cousin - surname not specified.

I already know the name of the shared grandfather and can enter an "unknown" child of that grandfather. But it seems that fh will not allow me to enter a grandchild (the cousin) unless I first specify the gender of the parent.

I have been trying and trying to do this with no success. Is there a work round?

I dont yet know the gender. There are other times, arent there in wills where one may be doesnt know the gender of the parent of a grandchild.
User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 28333
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V7
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: Grumble - Gender requirement

Post by tatewise »

The explanation hinges on the GEDCOM specification of Family records.

The only relationships for the Family group are HUSB, WIFE, & CHIL.
So you see, once you require a Family group neither parent can be sexless.
Otherwise, FH does not know which of the HUSB or WIFE links to use.
It does not really mater, because as soon as you discover the gender it can be changed, and FH automatically switches the HUSB and WIFE link around.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry
User avatar
ColeValleyGirl
Megastar
Posts: 5464
Joined: 28 Dec 2005 22:02
Family Historian: V7
Location: Cirencester, Gloucestershire
Contact:

Re: Grumble - Gender requirement

Post by ColeValleyGirl »

Mike, it does matter -- if you don't know the parent's gender, you shouldn't assign a misleading one, even if it can later be changed.
User avatar
Jane
Site Admin
Posts: 8507
Joined: 01 Nov 2002 15:00
Family Historian: V7
Location: Somerset, England
Contact:

Re: Grumble - Gender requirement

Post by Jane »

Personally I use a Potential Grandparent fact, adding the Grandparent(s) as witnesses to the linked person, this is the same method I use when I have potential parents, but not enough proof to confirm them. That way there is no danger someone else will take the link as confirmed.
Jane
My Family History : My Photography "Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad."
avatar
E Wilcock
Megastar
Posts: 1181
Joined: 11 Oct 2014 07:59
Family Historian: V7
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Grumble - Gender requirement

Post by E Wilcock »

When I cant do something I want to do in fh I still look at Roots Magic where a person of unknown gender can indeed have a child. There is a warning icon of a potential data problem in RM. But that is all.
User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 28333
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V7
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: Grumble - Gender requirement

Post by tatewise »

The point is that FH claims to be 100% compatible with GEDCOM and the specification requires Family HUSB and WIFE tags to link to Individual records with the correct Sex.
Other products often do not abide by the specification and that leads to the import and export problems we all know about.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry
User avatar
Ron Melby
Megastar
Posts: 917
Joined: 15 Nov 2016 15:40
Family Historian: V6.2

Re: Grumble - Gender requirement

Post by Ron Melby »

they CLAIM to be, is the operative word here. They allow HUSB HUSB and WIFE WIFE FAM records, as a trivial example, not the standard. Mormons will probably never allow that real world situation in their standard.
FH V.6.2.7 Win 10 64 bit
User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 28333
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V7
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: Grumble - Gender requirement

Post by tatewise »

Ron, I think that is an unfair dig at FH.
The FH Help page Exporting Same Sex Relationship Information explains the options very clearly, and includes a GEDCOM compatible option, although that is the one most unlikely to be recognised bu other products.
Faced with the need to represent same sex partnerships how would you implement it?

However, there are other (relatively minor) aspects that I agree are not 100% compatible.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry
User avatar
GeneSniper
Superstar
Posts: 381
Joined: 06 Dec 2016 20:40
Family Historian: V7
Location: East Kilbride, Lanarkshire, UK

Re: Grumble - Gender requirement

Post by GeneSniper »

Surely you do know the mothers sex just not who she is. Would that not be an easy solution to accept that the child's mother is female, it's not that long ago that this would have to have been the case (technology and all that).
William

* Illegitimi non carborundum *
User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 28333
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V7
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: Grumble - Gender requirement

Post by tatewise »

Yes, but you don't know that the mother is the daughter of the grandfather.
It might be that it's the father of the child who is the son of the grandfather.
Thus you don't know the gender of the grandfather's child who is parent of the grandchild.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry
User avatar
GeneSniper
Superstar
Posts: 381
Joined: 06 Dec 2016 20:40
Family Historian: V7
Location: East Kilbride, Lanarkshire, UK

Re: Grumble - Gender requirement

Post by GeneSniper »

Point taken Mike, I was looking from a more simplistic view.
William

* Illegitimi non carborundum *
User avatar
GeneSniper
Superstar
Posts: 381
Joined: 06 Dec 2016 20:40
Family Historian: V7
Location: East Kilbride, Lanarkshire, UK

Re: Grumble - Gender requirement

Post by GeneSniper »

Jane wrote:Personally I use a Potential Grandparent fact, adding the Grandparent(s) as witnesses to the linked person, this is the same method I use when I have potential parents, but not enough proof to confirm them. That way there is no danger someone else will take the link as confirmed.
Jane, I will have to get back to you later about how you do this. I know further down my tree there is a probable link between my father and mothers family, so technically they both have the same great, great, great grandparents. My problem lies with not being able to find a birth or marriage certificate for the female side and the census' started just after she was born, so the first census shows her as being just married. Both families stayed in the same small village and are the only families with their respective names, so I am quite sure of the fact I just can't prove it. This sounds just the ticket for how I can put the possible link in.
William

* Illegitimi non carborundum *
Post Reply