Wes Groleau wrote:
> Ian Goddard wrote:
>> Let's start by devising a better data structure than GEDCOM.
>>
>> .... GEDCOM is set up to handle a
>> particular name format used in one culture at one time. You're using
>> it to handle stuff from all over the world and over a time duration of
>> at least a millennium.
>
> That's not it's only flaw, but it's like Windows or VHS or C++
> Sure, there are far better available, but vendors won't sell
> what few customers will buy. And customers won't buy what
> few vendors will sell. Splice loop here.
>
> My beefs with GEDCOM are many. How about some little ones:
>
> - No one can have more than one nickname.
>
> - You can't get the date of death from one source and the place
> from another. Every source applies to the whole event.
>
> - The fact that Joe is the child of Fred & Mary needs no evidence,
> indeed, a source citation on a CHIL is not allowed.
>
> And yet, the genealogical world makes it hard for me to use anything
> else. I guess I can be thankful it's not worse.
>
>> Yes, there would be good value in sites like this but we need a far
>> better foundation on which to build them.
>
> Sites like what? Are you responding to his .sig ?
>
Yes. That's where I drew the examples. Loads of duplicates, loads of
mis-handled non-modern-western names. How many of the duplicates, one
wonders, have been taken from IGI, loaded into genealogy programs,
merged - maybe wrongly, re-ex****ted and uploaded?
--
Ian
Hotmail is for spammers. Real mail address is igoddard
at nildram co uk
|
