Open katelynnlindsey opened 9 years ago
Having "other" or open-ended questions makes a mess of data structure relations. For now, I'm going to keep this basic structure. Future versions may have more complex and dynamic data structures which can include grandchildren, grandparents, aunts/uncles, cousins, etc.
That sounds reasonable, although I don't really want to box people in!
I understand that, but that's not way data structures work. Having the open-ended question opens a new can of worms: what is the gender of the "other"? what is the generation of the "other"? is this a blood or marriage relationship? does age matter? etc. etc... This makes it more complicated for the user and much, much more complicated for the data structure underlying the form.
Great - I'm sure that as soon as I see how you plan to structure the data it will make more sense.
I don't have a plan for how to structure the data. That's something you (the researcher) will have to decide. You may need to work with someone who is better at PHP and data structures than I am. Right now my "data structure" is a literal one-to-one match between father/male parent, bother/male sibling, etc... There is no way to adjust this, since it is rigid and static right now. I can add more one-to-one matches, but adding complexity (the ability to change genders, add family members, or add descriptors such as older/younger to existing members like brother, etc.) is way beyond my expertise.
This cannot be resolved until Issue #5 is resolved.
I think that there should be a choice of templates.
The default template could be a traditional one with a default gender-neutral ego and five surrounding "wells" or relationship boxes: parents, siblings, children, spouses, other.