Add a search that includes witnesses about myopicvicar HOT 10 CLOSED

An earlier thread addressing labelling these:

Andy writes:
What exactly is the search criteria for surnames?

If I search for a specific name in FreeReg1 it will display all occurrences of that name

In this example I entered John BRIMBLE marriages within five years of 1820 and got the following:

 # Record Type Marriage Date Surname Forename County Place Name Found As
 1 Marriages 02 Nov 1817 BRIMBLE James Somerset High Littleton Groom Surname
 2 Marriages 18 Jun 1815 BRIMBLE John Somerset Bath Groom Surname
 3 Marriages 31 Oct 1824 BRIMBLE John Somerset Bath Groom Surname
 4 Marriages 17 May 1819 FREEMAN Henry Somerset Saltford Witness One Surname
 5 Marriages 13 Jul 1821 HOPKINS James Somerset Bath Witness Two Surname
 6 Marriages 25 May 1816 POOLE George Somerset Long Ashton Witness Two Surname
 7 Marriages 07 Apr 1817 POOLE John Somerset Long Ashton Bride Surname, Witness Two Surname
 8 Marriages 30 Apr 1821 REDGERS John Somerset Nailsea Witness Two Surname
 9 Marriages 17 Nov 1816 SMART John Somerset Bath Bride Surname

A similar search on FreeReg2 (although made harder by the lack of a date (range) will only find records where the groom's name matches. The current display is useful because it can reveal other relationships for that person.

from myopicvicar.

I responded:
The default search is just on "primary" names within the record -- for
marriages this means bride and groom searches.

If you check "Inclusive" (which we'll rename to something mores
useful, if anyone has suggestions), the search will be performed
against parent names as well for marriages, or relative names for
burials and baptisms. It does not search against witness names,
though it'd be quite easy to add that if this group thinks it'd be the
right behavior.

from myopicvicar.

Michael suggests:
How about "Include Relatives"?

from myopicvicar.

I respond:
I like "Include Relatives?"! It seems very clear.

from myopicvicar.

Andy points out:
Except that if we include Witnesses (as we do now and I believe we should continue to do so as they can provide more clues) these are not necessarily relatives.

from myopicvicar.

I respond:
How about "Search relatives and witnesses?" for a label?

from myopicvicar.

Michael indicates:
By definition, any names which are included in baptism and burial records are relatives. If we look at marriages, the only non-relative names are witness names.

Could there be an additional button, when marriages are included in the search, that is "Include Witnesses"?

from myopicvicar.

Andy responds:
Prefer Ben's latest suggestion rather than have an extra prompt (which would, presumably, only be displayed after the search criteria had been entered and marriages selected).

from myopicvicar.

Kirk suggests:
If it is 3 way Search then; Person; Include Relatives; Include Witnesses

from myopicvicar.

Note witnesses are in an embedded collection without limit on number

from myopicvicar.