This would seem to be a moot discussion because while swapping did change the relationship shown at the top the one via marriage is mentioned.
On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 11:28 AM, Penny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ah ... but the other thing is ... > > If one is more what might be called a family historian type as opposed to > what might be > called a strict genealogist type, there's no "merely" about said > relationship; rather, it > is a relationship in all respects. Personally, I'd like my gen program to > reflect that > so-called family historian perspective when I ask it to do so. :) > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Wynthner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Ah.. but here's the thing.... > *Any* in-law "relationship" is no genealogical relationship at all-merely a > social one or > a legal one (if that). > ;) > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Chick Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > OK, then Legacy should return the relationship as nephew-in-law. > but it returns "no relationship" which is wrong. > > > > > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: > http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp > Archived messages: > http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ > Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp > To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp > > > > Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyfamilytree.com/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
