Debian Bug report logs - #432409
gramps: Handling of unknown gender.

Toggle useless messages

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be>

To: submit@bugs.debian.org

Subject: gramps: Handling of unknown gender.

Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2007 21:38:55 +0200

Package: gramps
Version: 2.2.8-1

Hi,

It seems that gramps doesn't properly handle unknown gender in alot of
cases.  Some of the problems I've noticed:
- Importing a gedcom file with a line "1 SEX MF" gets you a male person.
  (This is what lifelines uses by default).  Having it empty does 
  properly get you an unknown gender.

  Note that the gedcom 5.5 standard only has "M" or "F" while the 5.5.1
  draft actually added an "U" for it.  I suggest that if it's different
  from "M" or "F" you make it unknown.

- Various reports treat an unknown gender differently:
  Examples:
  - "Reports->view->summary of the database" counts them as male.
  - "Reports->Text->Complete individual report" prints them as female.
  - "Reports->Webpage->Narrative web site" properly prints them as
    unknown.


Kurt

Message #10 received at 432409@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Alex Roitman <shura@gramps-project.org>

To: Kurt Roeckx <kurt@roeckx.be>, 432409@bugs.debian.org

Cc: control@bugs.debian.org

Subject: Re: Bug#432409: gramps: Handling of unknown gender.

Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2007 14:00:42 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

severity 432409 minor
tags 432409 + upstream
thanks

On Mon, 2007-07-09 at 21:38 +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> - Importing a gedcom file with a line "1 SEX MF" gets you a male person.

This is not valid gedcom:
   http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~pmcbride/gedcom/55gcch2.htm#SEX_VALUE
The fact that lifelines exports this implies a bug in lifelines.

>   (This is what lifelines uses by default).  Having it empty does 
>   properly get you an unknown gender.

This would be proper gedcom, and we handle that.

>   Note that the gedcom 5.5 standard only has "M" or "F" while the 5.5.1
>   draft actually added an "U" for it.  I suggest that if it's different
>   from "M" or "F" you make it unknown.

As you say, the 5.5.1 is a draft. That said, we could still probably
parse U. It would be a wishlist item, not a bug :-)
Filed with the upstream tracker:
   http://bugs.gramps-project.org/view.php?id=1112


> - Various reports treat an unknown gender differently:
>   Examples:
>   - "Reports->view->summary of the database" counts them as male.
>   - "Reports->Text->Complete individual report" prints them as female.
>   - "Reports->Webpage->Narrative web site" properly prints them as
>     unknown.

This is the second issue. Filed with the upstream tracker:
   http://bugs.gramps-project.org/view.php?id=1113


-- 
Alexander Roitman   http://gramps-project.org

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #19 received at 432409-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

From: Ross Gammon <rossgammon@mail.dk>

To: 432409-done@bugs.debian.org

Subject: gramps: Handling of unknown gender

Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 22:58:29 +0200

Version: 3.0.0

Upstream bugs 1112 & 1113 were fixed in Gramps 3.0

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.