Web based family history software

Question webtrees v2.1 Edit Page Design

  • norwegian_sardines
  • Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
More
2 years 5 months ago - 2 years 5 months ago #1 by norwegian_sardines
webtrees v2.1 Edit Page Design was created by norwegian_sardines
Greg said:

The 2.1 code is mostly complete.

What is missing is the design for the edit pages. We now have many more edit fields, and the form is difficult to nagivate.

Also, we have a separation between standard GEDCOM 5.5.1 and extenstions. I'm not 100% happy with the way that these are configured.

Since Greg has said this several times in the past I feel that I have been remiss in giving my thoughts on this topic and I also think that others may not know about his dilemma or may have opinions but did not know they could comment.

If you have not looked at the Demo site and navigated around a little with an eye on the data entry pages "latest beta", if you have time take a look.

I totally agree with Greg's comment above about not being very happy with the page. The page is too long and it is hard to know what you are entering as it relates to the GEDCOM Standard and the position of the tags within The Standard!

For Example: I can see that various levels (GEDCOM levels) of data are slightly indented. Shown here: The real trouble is that it is hard to know this with a quick glance and as you move down the page it gets harder and harder to know what is indented to what degree (what level from the FACT).

Also what complicates the page even more is the when you go in to edit the page, if the fact can have multiple subtags of the same type, for example: NOTE, SOUR and OBJE tags can all have multiple entries and within the SOUR tag you can have multiple TEXT tags. So this in GEDCOM terms would or could be:

1 BIRT
2 DATE
2 SOUR
3 DATA
4 TEXT
4 TEXT
2 SOUR
3 DATA
4 OBJE
4 OBJE
2 OBJE

This all get confusing in GEDCOM and the Edit Display is just as confusing and hard to follow! I realize that some of the problem is that moble devices and not computers have trouble with real estate and most modern browsers don't what you to support popups (I can't blame them at all!)

This gets even more complicated if one needs to apply a tag dialect (from some other genealogy program) on top of the GEDCOM Standard tags.

So... How to fix this issue, or at least make it better?

First, let me say that I am a strict GEDCOM advocate, I don't like all of the other programs using various tag dialects in their GEDCOM to support in many cases tags that are actually in the GEDCOM Standard but they don't use them.

Second, I don't use any other program other than webtrees. I tried to use others in the past, experiment with free ones to see how they worked with GEDCOM and rejected them!!

It seems to me that many other programs do only use a limited set of GEDCOM tags, I could be wrong here! Mainly,

DATE, PLAC, NOTE, SOUR, OBJE
(Some now use address and cause but not correctly for GEDCOM)

Some have in the past had a "description" field that they will place at the end of the "fact" tag even in cases where the tag (Events) does not allow one in the GEDCOM. Saying this however takes me off topic!

At first Blush some of the needs for the EDIT PAGE are thus:

1) Use tabs to move repeating level 2 tags away from the primary page. This would mean Level 2 tags NOTE, SOUR, OBJE (Media) get tabs of their own.

2) Indention is not enough, Either add level numbers, put boxes around groupings, or use vertical indention lines (I've seen this in code edit screen) to emphasize how each entry works within the tags and the fact as a whole.

3) Separate out the most used tags (Date, Place, Cause, Restriction) and use some kind of expanding accordion to display other less used tags and or less used subtags to other tags. (Sure that SOUR.EVEN.ROLE is not used by many)

These are just my thoughts and can be ignored by the community. I will probably regret writing this and change or retract things!! I'm glad I am not running for any office!

I'm hoping that v2.1 can be put into production soon so that PHP 8.0 support can be implemented and so we can move on to other pressing needs for webtrees. webtrees v2.1 is a big change and I know Greg has put a lot of work into putting it together, Implementing GEDCOM dialects (with some view toward GEDCOM v7 too), will be a positive advancement for round trippers and those moving to webtrees from other programs.

Ken
Attachments:
Last edit: 2 years 5 months ago by norwegian_sardines.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
2 years 5 months ago - 2 years 5 months ago #2 by ric2015
Replied by ric2015 on topic webtrees v2.1 Edit Page Design
To recap, here's what has been suggested so far. See also this issue .

Maybe we can show existing complex sub-tags (Source, Note, Associate etc) initially non-expanded, similar to how they are presented for addition in 2.0? That would give a better overview. Nested levels could still be problematic though.

Example (first fields such as date and place omitted):

Richard

webtrees 2.1.17 at cissee.de/webtrees2
Vesta custom modules (Classic Look & Feel, Gov4webtrees, Shared Places, Extended Relationships) available at cissee.de
Attachments:
Last edit: 2 years 5 months ago by ric2015.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
2 years 5 months ago #3 by Peter_S
Replied by Peter_S on topic webtrees v2.1 Edit Page Design
Another idea is to handle sub-tags of facts and events on level 2 in the same manner as it is already done in webtrees for tags on level 1.

That means, a selection of default tags is offered (date, place, source, notes) and all other possible sub-tags can be added via a selection field. If there are substructures behind a selected field again, this procedure can be repeated on the next level.

The selection list of allowed sub-tags is based on the offical substructures of the GEDCOM standard (ATTRIBUTE and EVENT structures for individuals and families). The payload of the selection list can be differentiated by GEDCOM versions (e.g. 5.5.1 or 7.0) and additionally supplemented by custom structures of third-party programs (e.g. FTM, Heredis, Brothers Keeper, etc.).

Peter

webtrees 2.1.19, vesta modules, chart modules of magicsunday, extended family and imprint of hartenthaler
PHP 8.2.4, MariaDB 10.3.38
Webhosting: genonline.de

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
2 years 5 months ago - 2 years 5 months ago #4 by ungeahnt
Replied by ungeahnt on topic webtrees v2.1 Edit Page Design

1) Use tabs to move repeating level 2 tags away from the primary page. This would mean Level 2 tags NOTE, SOUR, OBJE (Media) get tabs of their own.

2) Indention is not enough, Either add level numbers, put boxes around groupings, or use vertical indention lines (I've seen this in code edit screen) to emphasize how each entry works within the tags and the fact as a whole.

3) Separate out the most used tags (Date, Place, Cause, Restriction) and use some kind of expanding accordion to display other less used tags and or less used subtags to other tags. (Sure that SOUR.EVEN.ROLE is not used by many)

Hi Ken,

1) Can you show an example (graphic) with tabs. Somehow I can't imagine that.
Do you want to include a tab for each GEDCOM level? I also think that with tabs you no longer have all the information at a glance. I would see this as a disadvantage.

2) I absolutely agree, indention is not enough.
My suggestion is here: github.com/fisharebest/webtrees/issues/3...suecomment-942413361
The design can certainly be made a bit more compact / space-saving, but I find it clearly arranged, flexible and well adaptable for the GEDCOM levels. The depth of the unfolded items should be user definable (or add an 'unfold all' button).

3) On the edit page, I think the following should be displayed:
  • Standard items (e.g. definable by wt-settings). Regardless of whether they have already been assigned values or not.
  • and
  • all other items existing in the raw gedcom for this 'object'
  • and
  • an add-button (+) to add new items. According Peter's Post #3

However, I'm still not sure how to solve the order of listing in a reasonable way (especially when user-defined items and different GEDCOM variants come into play). I can well imagine that this becomes confusing.

The selection list of allowed sub-tags is based on the offical substructures of the GEDCOM standard (ATTRIBUTE and EVENT structures for individuals and families). The payload of the selection list can be differentiated by GEDCOM versions (e.g. 5.5.1 or 7.0) and additionally supplemented by custom structures of third-party programs (e.g. FTM, Heredis, Brothers Keeper, etc.).
Hallo Peter,
That sounds good. However, wt2.1 will 'only' come with GEDCOM V5.5.1 with additional enhancements. GEDCOM V7 is not planned yet, right?
Which extensions will be included in wt2.1 and which problems (regarding the design of the edit page) are expected?


Dieter

Dieter
Schmidt ⚭ Schwab (Sudeten) | Hauer ⚭ Bühler (Bayern / BW) | Маринов ⚭ Шаламанова (България)
webtrees 2.1.17 | PHP 8.1 | MariaDB 10.5
Last edit: 2 years 5 months ago by ungeahnt.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
2 years 5 months ago #5 by ungeahnt
Replied by ungeahnt on topic webtrees v2.1 Edit Page Design

Nested levels could still be problematic though.

What do you think about this nested grouping (see post before and here )?


Dieter
Schmidt ⚭ Schwab (Sudeten) | Hauer ⚭ Bühler (Bayern / BW) | Маринов ⚭ Шаламанова (България)
webtrees 2.1.17 | PHP 8.1 | MariaDB 10.5

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Powered by Kunena Forum
}