Hi! I have a question about name formats displaying (everywhere). An example:
I have a person, say:
First name: Petro
Middle name: Antonov
Last name: Andra.
And also I found some documents where he is Nikolaev instead of Antonov. And let’s add also Chish instead of Andra.
So, I need add this person with one first name, two middle names and two last names. But I understand, that his the most likely full name is: Petro Antonov Andra, and additional parts are Nikolaev and Chish.
So, I would see such names format for all my person’s:
Andra Petro Antonov (Chish, Nikolaev).
As I understand, now I can do something like this only:
Andra Petro (Antonov Nikolaev Chish).
So, this is a problem because I can not move my main middle name to the left side near the last name. Middle name is also important, the same as last name. But some first, middle, last names could be additional (and should be shown in brackets). Is it possible do it now or in the future?
What I can propose if it possible: allow add custom aliases for different names, which we can use in formatting formulas. Thanks.
There are quite a lot of options for achieving this:
In Display preferences, you can create custom display formats for Names. And you can switch between using those various formats.
In the Names tab of the Edit Person dialogs, you can create multiple alternate forms for a person. And, although “Birth Name” is the default, you can can make any of those alternate forms the ‘preferred’ format for a particular person. (Because of the couverture custom of the bride taking the groom’s surname in the USA, I tend to want to see a wife’s “Married Name” rather than her “Birth Name”. Unfortunately, this isn’t terribly simple to do en masse.)
But you can also do individually controlled overrides to the default Grouping, Sorting and Display Formatting of each person.
Because of recent current events, creating a British Royalty family tree sample was useful. But the “Surname, Given Suffix” format didn’t lend itself to monarchs. So creating a custom Display format of “Title, Given SUFFIX” and a new name type of “Reign Name” allowed a special case helped with the short line of monarchs. (The sample below has Queen Elizabeth’s birth name, her name as the heir presumptive, and her Reign Name. The new Display Format made charts look nicer too… no extra commas or missing surnames to confusing their listing.
@DaveSch yeah, looks like you did understand what I need. It will work as shown on your screen. But I’ve separated all my first, middle, last names between different attributes. I think it is more correct. I could also write full person name as string inside the Name field and it will also work. But it will be not flexible, I will not able use formatting if need. The same in your example with brackets.
So, It will work but not flexible ((.
PS: please do not take this as criticism, I’m just trying to understand what is the best way to get the expected result in the discussion.
Want to ask you maybe I can get the same result (as you shown above in brackets) but with separate first, middle, last names. I’ve shown it on the screenshot. Thanks.
@emyoulation Thanks for the example!
But I don’t understand how use suffixes in my case. I think suffixes - there are something another. Usually our people didn’t have suffixes, except maybe emperors e.t.c. But suffix is not for middle/last name, I think.
Or maybe I’ve not understand your idea.
But I would like to reach the same result with separate first, middle, last names because this looks more flexible. Also I already have a lot of people with separate name attributes. Before starting to work with Gramps, I watched videos where it was recommended to split the name to separate attributes, since it is more correct - and I agree with this.
The use of Suffix was just an example of how you can use different keywords to adjust the Name Display Format to do something you may not have even suspected was possible. An example of “thinking outside the box”.
You would use a different combination of keywords for your needs. It will take some experimenting with the format and choices of where to insert name data.
Yes, I tried to change the formatting formula. As you can see my formula is not default already. But it is still not the same what I need. As I understand, it is impossible to get such result which I expect. If possible, could you write such formula pls? Thanks a lot!
Although I am confident that the sheer number of name fields makes a workable solution possible, I find the naming conventions you have described to be… baffling.
A system cannot be set up without understanding the rules. So I’m not the right person to create this format.
I don’t think you achieve what you’re looking for in a single name record.
A “name” is highly culture-related and its definition varies across space and time.
A “name” in Gramps is based on several “components”:
inherited: will be stored in surname (may be family name, patrilineal, patronymic, matri-…, …)
intentionally received: usually given names
chosen deliberately by the individual: a pseudonym
attributed by others: nickname
honorific: this is the case in aristocracy with name of possession
…
Gramps tries to fold these “components” into record fields to allow some processing with the bits. A Gramps “name” is supposed to be a “closed form” to designate a person. Given names are all grouped together as a single logical component. Obviously this does not fit with your goal where you have variants coming from different sources. Don’t try to twist name fields into your schema. You’ll most likely create mess where names are already something complicated.
The surname can be split into individual “atoms” but it is mainly intended for specific rules like:
Spanish usage where children get father and mother family names, mother name being dropped on next generation
aristocracy: notably German usage where the possession are preceded by “von” or “zu” depending on the kind of authority they have and linked by “und”
In such a case (multiple conflicting names), I record several names because if he is designated as Andra, it won’t simultaneously be called Chish. I’d tag Petro Anotonv Andra as the preferred name and have other entries for Petro Nikolaev Andra and Petro Antonov Chish.
Having separate name records allows to associate them with specific citations. And citations have a confidence level which could help with your research.
Please note that I was only illustrating the use of multiple names. I did not take the additional step of using the name display editor to arrange the components. In other words, ignore the displayed “Andra Antonov Chish Nikolaev, Petro” in my example because the result would be different depending on how you do the formatting.
Another reason for using multiple names is that you probably have different citations (evidence) for each name, and those can be attached separately.
Guys, @GeorgeWilmes, @pgerlier, @emyoulation thanks for the answers! Got it. I think, I have investigate this a big feature of Gramps more deep, or maybe use it as is because my wishes are a bit specific :). Will research it more.
