Re: [Health-dev] About name on Party

[Marc Murray]

On Tue, 2015-08-18 at 19:52 +0200, Cédric Krier wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> First, if you are interesting in this discussion, I would like you read
> this [1] before going further.
> 
> As one of the original author of the party module, I want to say that
> this background was known when we wrote the party module and the fact
> there is only one single name field was on purpose.
> 
> So for me, the addition of the lastname field in health module is not
> correct because it is too locale specific.
> I tried to find where this distinction was needed in the health modules
> but I did not.
> So for me, there are two options to make GNU Health works better all
> around the world:
> 
> - Remove lastname field because we don't need it.
> 
> - Change lastname field for a (or many) field(s) for which the usage
>   will be clearly defined like: "called name" for sending mail.

I think we should remove the lastname field.

In any case, the "name" field should always be the name of the party,
not a part of the name. So, even if we don't remove lastname, we should
add "given_names" or similar so we can have name in the "name" field.
However, based on the varying naming customs around the world, given
name + lastname may be inappropriate.

I also like the idea of being able to define parts of a name in its own
model. So this way, for the situation where firstname and lastname need
to be retrieved indepently, that can be handled. And this could also
handle the "called name" or "common name" concept as well. 


> [1] http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-personal-names
> 
> PS: I'm willing to work on this once an agreement will be reached.
> 
So am I. Let me know how I can help.

---
Marc