Automated Entry of "Type" when selecting a "occupation"

[GedCom]

Hi,

when adding a totally new occupation (German "Beruf") by typing it out , the "type" field right next to it stays empty, so, ok.

when selecting an already given occupation (like "Arbeiter") is adds automatically an entry as type, that I added months ago to a totally different person. This is not wanted, it spoils many of my data entries, as I did not notice it. So I have several occupations "Arbeiter" automatically "typed" by e.g. "Käthnerfrau".

Any chance to correct this behaviour?

Thanks
Gerd

[Zurga]

Which version do you use ?

This behavior is not intended.

Zurga

[GedCom]

Ancestris-Version :  14.0.14157
Java:  21.0.10+7-Ubuntu-124.04 - /usr/lib/jvm/java-21-openjdk-amd64
System:  Linux - 6.17.0-20-generic

[GedCom]

Just to add a detail here:
 
When selecting the occupation name from the dropdown, nothing is automatically added in the type field.

But when starting to type (like in my case "Arb") and then selecting the corresponding entry in the dropdown of the available occupations, in that moment the type is filled automatically.

hope that helps narrowing it down.

Thanks
Gerd

[FredericL]

Hi, thanks for your message. It is certainly related to last week change. Let me look at it.

[FredericL]

Well, actually this is an automatism that was added a few months ago to facilitate the classification of the information description.
I could not find a translation for Käthnerfrau but it seems to me (I learnt German at school) that Arbeiter should be more probably the type of occupation and Käthnerfrau the description.
In which case both fields should be typed the other way around and in this case, Arbeiter is ok to be automatically populated if Käthnerfrau is always the description of an worker.

What do you think?

[GedCom]

I see what you mean.

I was under a different understanding, that e.g. if you have a "retired Officer" the occupation would be "officer" and the type would be "retired", so exactly the other way around.
Same for similar occupations like "königlicher Förster", Soldier of a specific army part ("Grenadier der 13. Kompagnie"), etc.

But if I misunderstood the intended semantics, and type is treated like a grouping mechanism, then I may have to change my entries.

So please help me to understand: is TYPE intende to be a sub-classification of OCCU or is TYPE a higher level categorization of OCCU?

PS: Käthnerfrau is the wife of a small cottage holder.

[Zurga]

Here is the exact definition in the GEDCOM specification :
EVENT_OR_FACT_CLASSIFICATION:= {Size=1:90}
A descriptive word or phrase used to further classify the parent event or attribute tag. This should be used whenever either of the generic EVEN or FACT tags are used. The value of this primative is responsible for classifying the generic event or fact being cited. For example, if the attribute being defined was one of the persons skills, such as woodworking, the FACT tag would have the value of `Woodworking', followed by a subordinate TYPE tag with the value `Skills.'
1 FACT Woodworking
2 TYPE Skills

This groups the fact into a generic skills attribute, and in particular this entry records the fact that this individual possessed the skill of woodworking. Using the subordinate TYPE tag classification method with any of the other defined event tags provides a further classification of the parent tag but does not change the basic meaning of the parent tag. For example, a MARR tag could be subordinated with a TYPE tag with an EVENT_DESCRIPTOR value of `Common Law.'
1 MARR
2 TYPE Common Law

This classifies the entry as a common law marriage but the event is still a marriage event. Other descriptor values might include, for example,`stillborn' as a qualifier to BIRTh or `Tribal Custom' as a qualifier to MARRiage.

So, yes, the TYPE is a higher classification of OCCU.

Zurga

[FredericL]

I was doing the same thing as Zurga, checking what the Gedcom specifications says.

To complement, I understand it could also be understood the other way around but the logic of the specifications seems to be a higher level.

My interpretation:
- For events with no description, it is rather clear, it "classifies" and distinguishes between 2 events of the same name.
- "Bishop" as a qualifier to ORDN
- “Stillborn” as a qualifier to BIRT (birth)
- “Civil” as a qualifier to MARR (marriage)
- “College” as a qualifier to GRAD (graduation)
- “Oral” as a qualifier to WILL

Now for events with a description, called "attributes", the question is legitimate but it should continue distinguishing 2 attributes of the same name (types of occupation, types of religions, types of residence, etc).
- For FACT, Zurga gave the example from the specification
- For OCCU, the specification does not say, but it should continue to be a type of occupation, as for other attributes, and the description text should then be the full occupation as written in the official documents of that person. Let's say the person was "Soldier in the 5th infantery regiment of the French territory army", that is what the description should say, and the type could be then "Military".

I hope this clarifies.

Best regards,
Frederic

[GedCom]

Thanks Zurga and Frederic,

I think I got the intended usage of the GEDCOM specs now. I will change my entries accordingly and then the given behaviour of the program makes sense to me.

Thanks for clarification.

Best regards
Gerd

[Zurga]

- For OCCU, the specification does not say, but it should continue to be a type of occupation, as for other attributes, and the description text should then be the full occupation as written in the official documents of that person. Let's say the person was "Soldier in the 5th infantery regiment of the French territory army", that is what the description should say, and the type could be then "Military".

The specification gives the same TYPE for all attributes and all event.
Only one description to rule them all 

Zurga