Hi Bob,
It's not just the gender of the partner that needs to be changed within the program.
It's also how all the relationships are calculated.

There are already long standing problems with the relationship calculator due to the way the relationships seem to use the males first to calculate the relationship. For example - fatherless families with children to different unknown fathers report as First Cousins rather than half siblings.

There are some other long standing issues when there are multiple marriages.

Rather than reviewing the known issues with the relationship calculator - I was just wanting to point out that more than a simple gender change in a table is involved. Immediate surrounding relationships report correctly - but if you set relationships from the parent of the same sex couple, the grandchildren etc aren't assigned a relationship in my quick testing.

I agree it is an issue that needs to be addressed as we live in the real world where same sex partnerships with children and grandchildren exist.

Cheers,
Cathy

At 08:12 AM 9/01/2007, you wrote:
<snip>
I have a great deal of difficulty reconciling the first two of those statements with the third one. If we can simply change one character in the database to achieve the desired results, why can't Legacy simply let us do that change within Legacy? What in the world could cause huge speed consequences and require so much programming? That's a puzzle that isn't quite obvious!



Have you unlocked the real power of Legacy? Legacy 6.0 Deluxe has 92 features 
not found in the Standard Edition. Learn more about these features at 
http://legacyfamilytree.com/DeluxeEdition.asp.

Legacy User Group guidelines can be found at: 
http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp

To find past messages, please go to our searchable archives at: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/

For online technical support, please visit 
http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp

To unsubscribe please visit: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp


  • Re: [LegacyUG] ... Cathy

Reply via email to