PAF themes or add-ons

Discussions about PAF, PAF SDK, and the future of PAF.
User avatar
thedqs
Community Moderators
Posts: 1042
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:53 am
Location: Redmond, WA
Contact:

Postby thedqs » Mon Jun 18, 2007 8:58 pm

I think James wanted his "rating" system to look like this:

1. I have very little information on this person. (end-of-line, 'brickwall' ancestor). (IE No sources except what my mother told me that her mother told me)
2. I have some information, but need more. (I have a census record showing this person)
3. I have basic name, date, and some other information. (I have birth certificate or marriage certificate)
4. I have most information needed for htis person (I have journals, census, birth, marriage, death records)
5. I have extensive information on this person. (I am this person...)

And then you could scan in your records or point to them in NFS.

Color coding though is hard for color blind people (There is another thread about this) so maybe symbols/icons to help the user along.
- David

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 26940
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:13 pm

thedqs wrote:I think James wanted his "rating" system to look like this:


I understand that. My question is: what will the rating system accomplish? How would you use it in your research? How would others use it?

I'd also point out that if we switched to a source-centric system this would become simpler to do, if not automatic.

User avatar
garysturn
Senior Member
Posts: 608
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 11:10 am
Location: Draper, Utah, USA
Contact:

Postby garysturn » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:25 pm

RussellHltn wrote:I understand that. My question is: what will the rating system accomplish? How would you use it in your research? How would others use it?

I'd also point out that if we switched to a source-centric system this would become simpler to do, if not automatic.


If there is two versions of the same person, say two different birth dates, the the highest rated source would be the one displayed and the other version would be listed as a contributed possibility. A birth certificate would be ranked higher than Grandma Smiths Group Sheet or downloaded from Ancestral File.
Gary Turner
If you haven't already, please take a moment to review our new
Code of Conduct

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 26940
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:55 pm

GarysTurn wrote:If there is two versions of the same person, say two different birth dates, the the highest rated source would be the one displayed and the other version would be listed as a contributed possibility. A birth certificate would be ranked higher than Grandma Smiths Group Sheet or downloaded from Ancestral File.


You've got the vision! And if you ever run into the odd birth date again, it's easy to see what sources had it and you can re-evaluate if needed. Or at minimum confirm that what you have is from the more authoritative source. I see source-centric as solving various problems that have plagued genealogy.

russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 26940
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Postby russellhltn » Tue Jun 19, 2007 12:29 am

thedqs wrote:Color coding though is hard for color blind people (There is another thread about this) so maybe symbols/icons to help the user along.


While I can understand trying to accommodate color blind people, we shouldn't abandon color completely either. For people with normal color vision, color is a very powerful communicator.

We also need to make sure our screens are friendly to screen readers for those who are completely blind. But we'd never abandon screens just because some people can't use them.

User avatar
thedqs
Community Moderators
Posts: 1042
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:53 am
Location: Redmond, WA
Contact:

Postby thedqs » Tue Jun 19, 2007 7:57 am

Oh yes color would be helpful too, just want to make sure that we don't forget about those that cannot distinguish color or shades of color.
- David

rmrichesjr
Community Moderators
Posts: 2048
Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2007 11:32 am
Location: Dundee, Oregon

Postby rmrichesjr » Tue Jun 19, 2007 11:29 am

JamesAnderson wrote:One thought here might be a way of the submitter using a rating system to tell everyone how far he's gotten on that particular name.

Let's say that 1 is barely have the info and 5 is substantially complete info.

1. I have very little information on this person. (end-of-line, 'brickwall' ancestor).
2. I have some information, but need more.
3. I have basic name, date, and some other information.
4. I have most information needed for htis person
5. I have extensive information on this person.

This could use refining somewhat, but you get the idea. That way, a person could see at a glance if there was help needed in finding the information on a person, or he could see that all the information that was desired would be there if he looked more closely at the underlying data.

Great for collaboration, great for saving time looking for things too. On the collaboration, someone would see a name and say, yes, that doesn't have the information, but I have more, and would combine his record with that one, and then both could end up benefiting from seeing that, and the person who said they had less information and needed help would then raise the rank to a higher one.

What might anyone see as pros or cons on such an idea?


Until or unless a more structured way is defined to represent the above information, wouldn't it make sense to add a short note, maybe one or two sentences, describing the state of research on the person or facts about him/her? At least in the early 2007 NFS beta, notes appeared to be a good fit for communicating that sort of information.

User avatar
thedqs
Community Moderators
Posts: 1042
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 8:53 am
Location: Redmond, WA
Contact:

Postby thedqs » Tue Jun 19, 2007 12:49 pm

Notes still would be good, but I would prefer a ranking "color/icon/number/etc" that I can sort by. That way I can look at the solid evidences first followed by other information. If you just have notes then you cannot rank the information.
- David


Return to “Personal Ancestral File (PAF)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest