search

ShammyLevva / FTAnalyzer

Family Tree Analyzer - Finds hidden details in your family tree. Install at
http://www.ftanalyzer.com/install
Apache License 2.0
56 stars 23 forks source link

BC Dates showing as errors #180

Closed lshep0921 closed 4 years ago

lshep0921 commented 4 years ago

Version: 7.8.5.0

I have a lot of entries in RootsMagic 7 with BC dates. They seem to work fine in that program, but they all came over in FTAnalyzer as errors. Is there a certain way they should be written to not throw errors?

Thanks, Lou

Version Number problem appears in You MUST provide this information so I know what the scope of the problem is. Bugs without this info are unlikely to be addressed. NB. at no time ever in the history of the app has there been a version called “latest” they all have a version number. eg: v7.2.2.0

Describe the bug A clear and concise description of what the bug is.

To Reproduce Steps to reproduce the behavior:

  1. Go to '...'
  2. Click on '....'
  3. Scroll down to '....'
  4. See error

Expected behavior A clear and concise description of what you expected to happen.

Screenshots If applicable, add screenshots to help explain your problem.

Additional context Add any other context about the problem here.

ShammyLevva commented 4 years ago

Can you give me an example GEDCOM snippet with a couple of dates please?

lshep0921 commented 4 years ago

CoupleofBCDates.txt

Here are 2 individuals with birth and death dates in BC Thanks, Lou

ShammyLevva commented 4 years ago

Thanks for that I can see it should be easy enough to ignore these as errors HOWEVER given the way dates are stored there isn’t much I can do to recognise the date without adding a whole lot of extra processing. Since this is such an extreme case I am simply not minded to put that work into the program for what would be a vanishingly small number of cases.

I’ll consider adding support to ignore errors but I suspect I’ll need to treat all such dates as UNKNOWN. Dates are held internally as start date/end date. With the lowest start date I can have is 01/01/0001 there is no provision I can see for negative years. Calculations that crossed the non existent zero year would need special treatment. The entirety of the system that deals with lower bound dates would have to change too.

As I say way way WAY too much effort for a situation that would affect one person in 10,000 and even then the vast majority will be the people who think they’ve actually researched that far back rather than real researchers such as yourself.

So sorry but I won’t be implementing recognition of pre 01/01/0001 dates.

ShammyLevva commented 4 years ago

BCE & CE dates now recognised along with their religious equivalents BC & AD. BCE & BC dates now treated as UNKNOWN as I cannot handle negative years.