Re: Genealogical evidence and data model

Haines Brown wrote:

> But Charles would then be linked to family of Urfather Andy, not to
> family of Urfather Bob. I thought the issue was to know whether this
> Charles was grandson of Andy or of Bob. 
> 
> Of course a human-radable NOTE could say, "This Charles is grandson of
> Andy". But that fact also strikes me as being machine-readable from the
> presence of the F4 link. That is,  the link to n @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   FAM will
> take me to the element in FAM, +1 HUSB @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  {0:1}, and this
> to n @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  INDI {1:1}, and in turn to +1
> <<CHILD_TO_FAMILY_LINK>>  {0:M}, which leads to n @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 FAM and
> thence to the @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  INDI {1:1}, for Andy. Or what am I missing
> here?  

After the above, I haven't a clue what you're getting,
much less what you're missing.

-- 
Wes Groleau

Words of the Wild Wes(t) = http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/WWW