ric2016 / shared_places Goto Github PK

If i wanna create a shared place by button, in extended facts (right to set gov-id), i see the window comes up, i see the Name, can search the GOV but can't enter them.

I can save and accept the pretend changes, under list the shared place is there and in summary the today GOV comes up, maybe cause it is defined by place?

• In case there is no source for Long/Lat data for the place itself, and the place name is hierarchical.

"Schön wäre nun ein Report, der alle LOC-Records mit den enthaltenen Daten (derzeit nur Notizen und Bilder) listet"

Drop this confusing option altogether?
(At least explain it better)

1. Option to only display shared place data (media notes) for selected events (CHR,RESI ...).

2. Option to display only once per place in a place list.

Hallo Richard,

while using vesta 2.1.7.1.1, I observed that the "GOV-Kennung" seems to be limited to 12 characters. Therefore, it is not possible to enter certain values, e.g. object_276612 (California).

In the Addendum R2 specification, I found the following:
<GOV_IDENTIFIER> := {Size=1:14}

Grüße

Markus

For users migrating to shared places + OSM, import data from wt_placelocation.

Notes in _LOC show up as error ('This type of link is not allowed here.') in
Control panel > Manage family trees > Check for errors

Webtrees 1 fix: add 'NOTE'
admin_trees_check.php line 117
'_LOC' => array('SOUR', 'OBJE', '_LOC', 'NOTE'),

Webtrees 2 fix: add 'NOTE'
AdminTreesController.php line 199

addfacts, uniquefacts, quickfacts should be configurable.
(just like for other record types)

Note: Other records type are configurable per tree - Do we want to support this as well? Seems a bit excessive (and if we do, why stop here - All custom module preferences could be made configurable per tree ...)

I’m an advocate for augmenting GEDCOM v7.1 to include “shared places” in the standard. I’m advocating for “shared place” to have a tag name of SPLAC which would follow the already implemented “shared note” tag of SNOTE which is a change from the v5.5.1 name of NOTE.

What headache would it cause your module to change the current value of _LOC to _SPLAC for a future release? Could this be a setup parameter to select either _LOC or _SPLAC?

The GEDCOM committee likes to include functional updates that are already used and supported by programs today and this could be used to support this important change to the GEDCOM Standard in the future.

thanks for your feedback