[dankent]

I really like the overall approach - definitely a nice friendly way to edit a tree.

The standard way for family trees to link children with parents is through the relationship of the parents. Did you avoid doing that on purpose?

The problem with having a separate parent/child link for every parent/child relationship is that it gets very crowded if the parents have several children.

[fiatjaf]

I don't have experience in this area, but wouldn't the standard way get pretty messy in modern relationships, in which people have multiple children with multiple different alternating parents?

[dankent]

I assume you want to represent all of the relationships on the tree in any case, so I think minimising the number of required parent-child lines would actually make representing modern relationships less messy.

You'd have a pink relationship line for each partnership (that will be the same and just as messy in both approaches)

Then you'd have one child line from each relationship line to each of the children that came from that relationship, rather than two for each child.

So in a situation where Angus had 2 children with each of Beatrix and Chloe, you would have two child lines from the Angus-Beatrix relationship line and two from the Angus-Chloe line, rather than a total of 8 lines to show all the parent-child relationships in your current approach.

If Chloe also had two children with David then your approach would add a relationship line and another four child lines whereas the standard approach would just add the relationship and two more child lines.

[fiatjaf]

I was thinking about not having relationship lines or even the concept of "relationship" at all. Relationships don't have any meaning concerning family nowadays, only kinship has.