My family history narrative is recorded in a series of Word documents, Andrew, one for each generation starting at Generation A (my parents) and working backwards through generation B (my grandparents), generation C (my great grandparents) and so forth.
Each grandparent has a unique identifier code (A1 is my father; A2 is my mother; B1 is my paternal grandfather; B2 is my paternal grandmother; B3 is my maternal grandfather; B4 is my maternal grandmother; and so on through the generations).
In the narrative for each generation, there is a separate heading for each of the ancestors I have been able to identify, beneath which I record all of the information I have been able to gather about them, all footnoted with source references.
I have no difficulty including what you call "non-data". Typically, I will introduce this with "According to family tradition, ..." and I will then footnote that with details of who told it to me, and when. If possible, I will look for some hard information to corroborate it. E.g. my Great Great Grandfather Joseph Oakey was, according to family tradition, a delivery driver (horse-drawn vehicles) who died when he fell from the box seat and was crushed by the wheels of his own cart. I have been able to find a record of the inquest into his death in June 1896 which corroborates this in all material particulars (save that it was a van, not a cart ...). Other family tradition is not so easily corroborated, but it still deserves its place in the narrative and is still included for what it is worth, footnoted accordingly.
Hearsay evidence is still evidence, not "non-data"; and provided it is recognized for what it is and treated with appropriate care as befits hearsay evidence, I see no reason why it should not be included in the narrative.
