Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 12 total)
Author
Posts
  • #1860

    Usually I add pics to events and any kinds of documents to citations. No problem if I create a new citation, but it’s pretty unhandy that it is impossible to add media objects to existing citations. (See old wt bug report.)
    This bug is on the wt list for more than two years, is there more hope if I put that on the kiwi wishlist?
    😉 Grimpel

  • #1861

    is there more hope if I put that on the kiwi wishlist?

    Possibly, but it it really necessary? Personally if I’m going to the trouble of adding media objects I want visitors to see them. So I add them to the event, not hidden inside a source reference.

    Also, if you take a slightly complex GEDCOM snippet such as:

    1 BIRT
    2 DATE 11 OCT 1871
    2 PLAC Sevenoaks, Kent, England
    2 ADDR Shambles
    2 OBJE @[email protected]
    2 SOUR @[email protected]
    3 DATA
    4 TEXT This is source text (DATA.TEXT tag)
    3 PAGE This is a source citation (PAGE tag)
    3 OBJE @[email protected]

    Looking at the GUI, how would an editor know if a media object was part of the event, or part of the source?

    If there was no media object present, how would he know how to add it to a source and not to the event? Where would you put the new “Add object” link?

    Nigel
    My personal kiwitrees site is www.our-families.info
  • #1862

    Putting aside my concerns about the GUI for this, it is actually an easy fix, unless I’ve missed something.

    Try the attached replacement for the file /includes/functions/functions_edit.php

    I may have thought of a solution to the GUI complications as well, or even three possible solutions…

    1. If you click on the last small icon to the right of any PLACE field you get two new entry fields for Longitude and Latitude. These are differentiated, at least in the standard theme, with a lighter background colour. So we coulld easily do the same with the media object field within the source.

    2. There is an admin option to display ‘Full source details”. (Administration > your family tree > Edit options > “Use full source citations”. If set to ‘yes’ then additional fields for QUAL (quality of data) and DATE (Date of entry in original source) appear. Another solution is therefore to include the media entry with these two, so only available for sites that opt to display “Full sources”. That would avoid confusing users on sites that prefer not to use these features.

    3. We could go further and remove the “Full sources” option completely. But replace it with an icon titled “Advanced source details”. Place the icon to the right of the Source field (after “Create new source”). Clicking on it would be just like the Lat/long icon after Place fields. It would make three new source fields appear – QUAL, DATE and OBJE. I think this might be an ideal solution?

    What do you think?

    Nigel
    My personal kiwitrees site is www.our-families.info
  • #1866

    Testing the three possible solutions, I will have to remove 3. It becomes very messy when there are multiple sources. The javascript that displays the hidden fields doesn’t know which set of QUAY / DATE / OBJE tags it is referring to on the page.

    So I propose option 2.

    Please test that, from the attached revised file.

    Nigel
    My personal kiwitrees site is www.our-families.info
  • #1869

    The new edit-function is exactly what I need! Thanks a lot!!

    Happy Grimpel

    I agree with you that this might be confusing. Especially when you have one media object attached to a citation and some more to the event itself, you get a confusing list of media objects in the edit-window. But nevertheless right now I’m very happy with the new edit-function. By the way: I do use full source citations and I have sources automatically expanded.

    It’s 3:30 a.m. here in Germany and I feel to tired to produce deep thoughts on the GUI. Please give me some time and I will make up my mind. Thanks again and good night!

  • #1870

    I’m a little bit sleepy and cann’t find the difference between edit 2 and edit3?

  • #1871

    In edit2 I have two icons, add existing media and add new media.
    In edit3 the icon “add new media” is gone.

    I would prefer edit2 and it seems to work fine.

  • #1872

    I agree with you that this might be confusing. Especially when you have one media object attached to a citation and some more to the event itself, you get a confusing list of media objects in the edit-window.

    I will change the background colour of the three “full source” fields so they are more obviously part of the source.

    I’m a little bit sleepy and cann’t find the difference between edit 2 and edit3?

    For you there will be no difference. But with edit3 if you disable “Full sources” the media item as well as the QUAY and DATE tags will be hidden. Not important to you, but less confusing for others.

    In edit2 I have two icons, add existing media and add new media.
    In edit3 the icon “add new media” is gone.

    Yes, this is “normal”. You see an “Add media” icon if there is no media present, but it is not necessary if media is already there. All you then need is to either delete the item to remove it, or find a different item to edit it. It is actually the same in both edit 2 and edit3.
    If you want to add a second item you would normally use the bottom of the screen option to “Add a new media object”.

    The problem for you will be that there is no way to add a second media object to an existing source. I can’t immediately think how to overcome that limitation but if I have time I will look.

    Nigel
    My personal kiwitrees site is www.our-families.info
  • #1879

    edit3 works fine 🙂

    The problem for you will be that there is no way to add a second media object to an existing source.

    It’s realy very rare that I wish to do so. So don’t worry about that.

    2. There is an admin option to display ‘Full source details”. (Administration > your family tree > Edit options > “Use full source citations”. If set to ‘yes’ then additional fields for QUAL (quality of data) and DATE (Date of entry in original source) appear. Another solution is therefore to include the media entry with these two, so only available for sites that opt to display “Full sources”. That would avoid confusing users on sites that prefer not to use these features.

    In my point of view a consistent appliance of this approach implicates that the media object field in the “Add new citation” should be also removed/hidden (if option “Use full source citations”=”no”) like in the edit mode.

    I will change the background colour of the three “full source” fields so they are more obviously part of the source.

    Would be perfect!

    One more suggestion: Shared notes still have the same issue like media objects (had). Maybe we should have four “full source fields” and handle the shared notice the same way like media objects?

  • #1935

    Yes, this is “normal”. You see an “Add media” icon if there is no media present, but it is not necessary if media is already there. All you then need is to either delete the item to remove it, or find a different item to edit it.

    I don’t understand this. E.g. I want to add a pic to Mary’ & Peter’s marriage. I have a “add media” and “find media” button. I add a new media object. Then Mary complains “This is not me, it is my sisters marriage!” I have to change/edit that. I have only a “find media” button.

    Why is it now more likely than before that the approbiate media already exists on the server?
    Where is my mental blackout?

    I will change the background colour of the three “full source” fields so they are more obviously part of the source.

    Found that implented with the new release 1.4.4.1 Very nice, thank you kiwi!!

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 12 total)
  • The topic ‘Add media to citation’ is closed to new replies.