Open michelesalvador opened 5 years ago
Fair enough. I'm happy to merge a pull request.
To be honest, the same names DISPLAY_TYPE
and getDisplayType
no longer seem correct to me, because here it's nothing about the type, it's about the main definition of an event...
So they may be something like DISPLAY_NAME
and getDisplayName
.
Current behavior of
EventFact.getDisplayType()
is to return a display type obtained from the tag of the event.The tag
MARR
produces the display type "Marriage". So far, so good.Things change when a
TYPE
is defined. Take for example:In this case the display type of Marriage is "Other".
But the GEDCOM standard (5.5.1 more than 5.5) clearly suggests another use for
TYPE
value:So, for my comprehension, the result of
getDisplayType()
should be yet "Marriage", or maybe something like "Marriage (Common Law)", but not "Other".At last, if the value of
TYPE
is present among personal or family event fact tags, the correspondent display type is returned:The display type of this Marriage event will be "Common law marriage". Even if this example can appear correct, in GEDCOM standard I found no trace that the
TYPE
value can be a tag that completely replaces the parent tag.