Pat, You say “if there is no known relationship that resulted in a marriage” and continue “the ability to say (on the individual screen) that the individual never married”.
So if there is no *known* relationship then the person never married? Really – bigamists with an unknown first marriage for example? And I could give a number of others. I have no particular objection to your request, but even by itself for somebody over marriageable age to be declared as to “never have married” because records cannot be found does not make sense. Ron Ferguson http://www.fergys.co.uk/ From: Pat Hickin Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 10:15 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] marriages But if there is no known relationship that resulted in a marriage or in any known children, you don't have a marriage screen. All I am asking for is the ability to say (on the individual screen) that the individual never married without making any kind of statement in regard to children, since I have no way of knowing (especially for a man and most especially for one long since dead) whether he fathered children. It seems so obvious to me!! As for those of you who are weary of this discussion, just don't bother to read the correspondence on the subject -- !! Pat On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:05 AM, Tony Slunka <[email protected]> wrote: Tony As a programmer you know that for the statement "This person did not marry and had no children" to be true both parts of the statement must be true. If there is no marriage/relationship and no child the you would mark the "This person did not marry and had no children" If either part is false than either a child was born or a marriage occurred. If a child was born than a marriage/relationship occurred. The marriage screen allows you to mark "did not marry" if this is the case. If a marriage occurred the marriage screen allows you to mark " no children" if this is the case. Tony S. -----Original Message----- From: Tony Rolfe [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, June 22, 2013 9:27 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [LegacyUG] marriages Jay I wrote my first program in 1967 and was a professional programmer and database designer from 1972 until I retired in 2004. I have designed and implemented databases far more complex than that used by Legacy - which is in no way meant to belittle the Legacy programmers. No database should be any more complex than necessary. If I (or my team) ever implemented something which did not reflect the reality of the situation we were emulating, then we would consider it a bug. All Pat and I want is for the statement "This person did not marry and had no children" to be split into two halves, and for the "did not marry" half to be available when there is a relationship record created in Legacy. If anyone has no use for that, then fine - don't use it. I have no use for LDS ordinances, so I make no comment about them. If a person did not marry, then that is something which should be recorded at the individual level. It is a little strange to suggest that the fact that someone did not marry should be recorded in a marriage record. Yes, I have entered this as a suggestion through proper channels. Tony Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
