I think this has been discussed before but I can’t remember for sure. I just now encountered the following scenario. I corrected a date for a fact for a person in RM7 and RM7 changed the sort date for the fact to match. I corrected the same date for the same fact for the same person in RM8 and RM8 did not change the sort date for the fact to match.
Is that really the way it works in RM8? I think it is.
If so, is it a bug in RM8 or is it a feature in RM8? I tend to think it’s a bug.
Maybe
I now remember the discussion about the dashed sort dates. As you say, the behavior has to do with manually changed sort dates, not with dashed sort dates.
In my recent case, I was changing a Birth date from something like “about 1949” to something like “12 Dec 1948” because I had discovered new information that provided a more precise Birth date. The approximate Birth date had been based on the person’s age when they got married.
I also have a Parents fact for everyone in my database who actually has parents and the Parents fact has the same fact date as the Birth date. I therefore have do something with sort dates to assure that the Birth fact is in front of the Parents fact. So when I changed the date for the Birth fact I also changed the date for the Parents fact. The sort dates for the Birth fact and Parents fact didn’t track with the changes to the main fact dates. I think they should. And I don’t remember anyone ever requesting this change in behavior.
There does seem to be a number of places where RM8 generates an associated field when a value is first entered, but doesn’t regenerate the associated field if that initial value is changed.
One I have issues with is the citation name. Enter the citation details and the citation name is generated from them. Change the citation details and the initial citation name is unchanged.