For issues related to the current stable release please use it's own Help forum.
IMPORTANT:Please read this before using an git or nightly build version: wiki.webtrees.net/en/GIT

Before asking for help please read "How to request help" by clicking on that tab above here.

TOPIC: [SOLVED] Same-sex marriage issue

Same-sex marriage issue 1 month 2 weeks ago #1

  • lpatwell
  • lpatwell's Avatar
  • Offline
  • New
  • Posts: 11
Hello:

When you enter the spouse of a male, you can select its gender.

For a same-sex marriage of 2 males, when you open the marriage records, the genders are correct. Yet you see "wife" instead of husband or spouse. Could you correct that?

Thanks.

Luke
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Same-sex marriage issue 1 month 2 weeks ago #2

  • fisharebest
  • fisharebest's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 11118
Hi Luke, although it probably sounds like a simple fix, it's actually quite complicated.

These are labels for "ages", not for indivduals, and the underlying data isn't directly connected.
The GEDCOM data model allows you to record "husband's age" without actually recording a husband.

I've created an entry for it on the issue tracker, and will look at it as soon as I can.

github.com/fisharebest/webtrees/issues/2415
Greg Roach - This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. - fisharebest.webtrees.net
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Same-sex marriage issue 1 month 2 weeks ago #3

  • lpatwell
  • lpatwell's Avatar
  • Offline
  • New
  • Posts: 11
Thanks for putting it in your to-do list ;-)

Another change I would like to see is the possibly of selecting the proper gender of an individual. Male, female, ? is not suffisant any longer.

Thanks again.

Luke
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Same-sex marriage issue 1 month 2 weeks ago #4

  • fisharebest
  • fisharebest's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 11118
> Male, female, ? is not suffisant any longer.

A little background. There is a "de facto" standard for genealogy data called "GEDCOM".
It is pretty much essential than any genealogy application is compatible with this format.

GEDCOM was originally created by the Church of Latter Day Saints - for their internal use.
As a church, it unsurprisingly has a traditional view of family relationships.
A family record "FAM" consists of one HUSB record and one WIFE record.
Same-sex relationships aren't supported at all.

webtrees (and a few other applications) work around this by ignoring the part of the specification that says:
"The family record structure assumes that the HUSB/father is male and WIFE/mother is female."

This approach maximises the chances of other applications being able to understand our data.
It also seems to get past most GEDCOM validators.

Keeping our data open and accessible is of critical importance.
We therefore need to deviate from the GEDCOM specification as little as possible.

As you might imagine, GEDCOM has a narrow definition of sex.
An individual has only one sex record, which must have one of the values: Male, Female, Unknown.
It may not have any other attributes such as date, notes, etc.

webtrees *could* introduce other codes. One option is to add "Other", as per the ISO 5218 standard.
I'm not aware of any other genealogy application that has done this, so there are no examples or precedents to follow.
But if we add custom values, then any other (GEDCOM-compliant) application should theoretically ignore them and consider the individual to have SEX=U
So, this would probably be OK.

Multiple sex records unlikely to work. Too much logic in too many applications are written on the
assumption that GEDCOM records will only have one sex record.

However, the biggest challenge might be in the way we create labels.
At present, each step in a relationship has one of three possible values.
e.g. son-daughter-child or mother-father-parent or aunt-uncle-aunt/uncle

Adding extra permutations here would require a considerable amount of work, and the only feasible option is to treat all other genders as "U".

The same applies to the text based reports which build up sentences such as "He was born on <date> in <place>".

In summary, I think that external constraints and the effort involved mean that this is unlikely to be possible.
Greg Roach - This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. - fisharebest.webtrees.net
The administrator has disabled public write access.

[SOLVED] Same-sex marriage issue 1 month 2 weeks ago #5

  • lpatwell
  • lpatwell's Avatar
  • Offline
  • New
  • Posts: 11
Problem solved.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Powered by Kunena Forum