Error in Tree Charts in Book Script

[teddiec]

I found a possible bug in the Book script relating to Tree Charts in that names appear to disappear.

I have attached 4 images. Figs 1 and 2 show the name of Mary McNeilly [671] as expected but in Figs 3 and 4 you can see the name has been dropped from the chart.

Any ideas?

[John Nairn, Developer]

I see the images, but cannot think of a reason or find a bug. I might need to see your genealogy file (if you want to send by a separate email).

Here are my ideas:

1. Both places the name is omitted are when Mary McNeilly is father's father's father's mother. I looked at section of the script that looks up that ancestor and it looks fine. Also, if the bug did not get that cell because of a bug, it would fail to get it for all charts (I would expect). Do you ever see father's father's father's mother correctly filled in in other charts?

2. Mary McNeilly [671] is spouse of John Connolly [646] and mother of John Busby Connolly [618]. You could look at those records to see if anything is unusual such as John Connolly being a spouse in more than one family record or John Busby Connolly being a child in more than one family.

Other then that, I would need the data file to test and check further.

[teddiec]

I'll send you my file separately John... there are a few other places where names appear to be missing... all on the paternal lines

[John Nairn]

I think I did find a bug and not sure when or how it got there. It will be fixed in next version (along with some other book script improvements currently in development). In the mean time, you (and others using this script) should be able to fix it as follows:

1. Start GEDitCOM II

2. Hold down option key and choose Reports->Generations LaTeX Book from the scripts menu. This step will open the script for editing in the GEDitCOM Editing

3. Do Command-F (i.e. Find Command) and search for the text "treePerson(pppp"

4. Insert the following line just below the line found in step #3:

                   treePerson(pppm,4*hlen,29,True)

5. Make sure the indent to the start of this line is EXACTLY the same as the lines before and after it (a Python requirement)

6. Save the script

7. Go back to GEDitCOM II and try your book

Let me know how it works.

Thanks,

John

---------------
John Nairn (1-541-737-4265, FAX:1-541-737-3385)
Professor and Richardson Chair
Web Page: http://www.cof.orst.edu/cof/wse/faculty/Nairn/
FEA/MPM Web Page: http://oregonstate.edu/~nairnj

[Edward Connolly]

Hi John

Thanks... Mary is now back in the tree where she belongs :)

Any idea about the other images I sent?

 

Eddie

  Eddies Extracts: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~econnolly/
  Eddies Blog: http://anextractofreflection.blogspot.com/
  On Facebook: http://facebook.com/eddiesextracts

---

From: John Nairn <johna...@gmail.com>
To: geditcom-ii...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, 9 May 2012, 4:45
Subject: Re: Error in Tree Charts in Book Script

[John Nairn]

I didn't notice the figures, but I looked at them now. The ones in the father's father's father's mother slot are now in the book (ater fixed bug). It looks the remaining ones are because those parents are not in the book. The trees is showing only names that are actually in the book and not extending to names in the file (if they are not in the book). The one exception is for parents of the root person in any tree - both parents are shown even if one is not in the tree.

The remaining question is way are they not in the tree and could they be added. The current method to populate a book is to:

1. For each source individual, find all their ancestors.

2. For each ancestor found in step 1 who has not further ancester (i.e., tree tops) find all descendants

In this process, parents of descendants may not have all their parents in the book. You could alter the book names by adding extra source individuals or by picking root individuals for an earlier generation.

Now it migth be possible to have those trees include parents of anyone in the tree (like it does for root generation), but it does not do it now. I will take a look at that.