It doesnt have to be present, just said it because thats what Dave mentioned.
It just have to be somehow mark that its a span but one of the dates is unknown or havent happened yet or something. Just having Gramps accepting an empty date or something and only show “from X” would be just as good. (or To X if its the other date)
I just want it to better than it seems for me it is now, I dont care what exact way it is, that above or some word is accepted as subsitute.
From what you wrote before, it seemed like you were more interested in showing that one of the endpoints WAS definite.
“After” was too indistinct because it obscured the starting point too.
Chopping up the “From <date> to <date>” phrase so that it COULD be valid with only 1 of the 2 terms would be destructive to the confidence in that range. Right now you KNOW that a ‘from’ starting point must have a ‘to’ ending point. Otherwise, it was it was a partial entry that must be fixed.
So more of a “Beginning” and “Until”?
Personally, I’ve always wanted an optional ± (give or take, plus/minus) scope modifier to supplement the About. The Dates preferences allow the general scope of the approximation to be overridden. When calculating a birth date date from an age, the approximation scope is ±1 year – unfortunately the default “about” scope is ±50 years.
BUT that more refined scope can already be expressed as “BET <date> AND <date>”… so maybe what I really want is a “± shorthand rule” in the interpolator feature of the date validator. (Something that rewrites a “June 1856±10” as “between June 1846 and June 1866”. Likewise, a “x shorthand rule” so that “186x” is rewritten as “between 1860 and 1869”.)
I want to be able to have an event where one of the endpoints is definite, a spesific date, while the other is open ended.
Either because one of the dates its totally unknown, or because its still continuing to this day. (I dont need a way to differensiate between those two btw)
Yes, “after” is in my mind too indisinct.
Most of the time its a known spesific, definite start date and the end date dont exist, but it is clearly a long term event and not a one day or week thing, like an occupation for example.
To me, that makes no difference in the events I am currently thinking of, both of them is valid options, if gramps supported it without it being considered just text.
Currently, many of the events I an wanting this for is either listed with just one standard date, or the “after”, different different places, but none of them is accurate enough to me. (and I should change them to be the same method at some point)
I have no idea what of them to use for now.
There is a Pull Request related to modifying the Date handler for open spans.
Anyone interested this subject will want to follow that code experiment.
1 Like
Oh, that one have been going on for quite a while 