We seem have different custom attribute types for each object e.g. persons or events.
This causes the following behaviour:
Adding/changing event attributes of an event opened from event view allows you to select the (custom) event attribute types.
Opening the same event with the event reference editor only allows you to select from the (custom) person attribute types instead of (custom) event attribute types.
Wouldn’t it make more sense if we either always show all custom attribute types or only show the custom attribute types of one type of objects to their appropriate refernece editor? The mixing of attribute types is unexpected and confusing in my opinion. The predefined attribute types seem to be the same for all attributes, but the custom attribute types seem to differ by the object type.
Yes. There are person, family, event, media and source custom attribute types. Only the relevant types are shown, otherwise we would have a rather long list.
You can add a custom Attribute Type to an event but yes, for some reason, they are not remembered.
I never think of Attributes being for any particular usage.
I used to create the attributes in a person’s record then after saving them, I then deleted them. They would then be available for events. But periodically, I will do a clean import from a backup. Even though these custom attribute types were attached to events, they would once again be lost from the drop-down selection.
I have a “Person” whose name is “Anchor Do Not Delete” that holds any loose items. Most notably notes and images I use in the Narrative Web report. He now has a list of personal attributes I use as custom event attributes.
@Nick-Hall Which criteria does cause ‘event attribute types’ being shown in edit event editor (event view), but ‘person attribute types’ are always shown in edit event reference editor (person view, relationship & familiy view)? I mean I’m still editing events (yes referenced events), but why do I choose from ‘person attribute types’ instead of ‘event attribute types’? That confuses me.
I kindly disagree, they are useful to store key/value type of information which can be easily accessed by filter rules. I’m currently using them for indexing events (referenced as well as unreferenced) with a father, mother and godfather fields for births for example. I’m also thinking about writing a customized filter searchbar gramplet which has attribute type and value searchfields (that should be faster than changing the filter rules).
The alternative to that system would be writing a new view, with different (user-definded?) tables for different event types and a way to store them. (or different views for each table?) That would have some advantages, but the amount of work and stuff I’d have to change in gramps for that scares me away from that approach.
Let me clarify. I use attributes extensively. I just have never thought of them as “Event Attribute Types”, “Person Attribute Types” or “Source Attribute Types” , etc. I just think of them as “Attribute Types”
