On Jul 17, 11:39 am, mels...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Robert Melson)
wrote:
> In article <1184689853.767732.28...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> "the_vermina...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <the_vermina...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
writes:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 17, 12:34 am, Lars Eighner <use...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> Here is the problem: GEDCOM has become the de facto standard for
family
> >> history and geneology data. And the problem with that is that the
Mormons
> >> own GEDCOM and thus it is rife with built-in religious limitations.
>
> >> As you might expect, GEDCOM does not allow you to enter a family
created by
> >> same-*** marriage or civil unions even where they are lawful. But
there are
> >> other limitations. For example, in GEDCOM 5.xx, an adopted child
does not
> >> belong to his family. When he looks up his family in a
GEDCOM-compliant
> >> file, he is not there. How needlessly hurtful is that?
>
> >> If a guy marries his 14-year-old cousin as his fifth wife, GEDCOM has
no
> >> problem dealing with that kind of family. But it cannot handle the
Brady
> >> Bunch.
>
> >> Now I suppose you could defend GEDCOM by saying it is supposed to
record
> >> only genetic --- that is, biological --- relation****ps. And of
course,
> >> there are im****tant scientific and especially medical uses for that
kind of
> >> information. But it is not really true that GEDCOM records
biological
> >> relation****ps. It presumes that the husband of a woman who bears a
child is
> >> the father of the child, and we know since there is now DNA testing
that
> >> assumption is untrue in a significant ****tion of cases.
>
> >> Which brings me to my point. I'd like to develop a family history
system
> >> that is as compatible with GEDCOM as possible (since it is, as I have
said,
> >> the de facto standard with tons of software applications), but with
> >> extensions to handle many diverse kinds of families that exist both
in
> >> modern America and in many traditional cultures.
>
> >> So, I would be grateful for any pointers to existing software that
handles
> >> all families or suggestions for extensions.
>
> >> --
> >> Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/>
<http://myspace.com/larseighner>
> >> Countdown: 553 days to go.
> >> Owing to massive spam from googlegroups, I do not see most posts from
there.
>
> > Check out The Master Genealogist.
>
> > As an aside you should note that any program that depends on GEDCOM
> > for anything other basic BMD info will have serious shortcomings
> > depending on how the ex****ting and im****ting software follow the
> > GEDCOM "standard" - which, imho, should be scrapped in its entirety.
>
> Out of curiosity, what would you suggest replace the gedcom
> "standard"? Is the problem so much with the standard or with
> the programs that implement it? As Micro$oft and Oracle have
> amply proved, a standard exists as a standard only so long as
> the players consider themselves bound by it; once the standard
> is breached it becomes meaningless.
>
> Bob Melson
>
> --
> Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas
> -----
> "People unfit for freedom---who cannot do much with it---are
> hungry for power." ---Eric Hoffer- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I suggest a narrative text file. That is what I give others to whom I
provide information. Thus, I am free to give exactly the information I
want to give complete with cautions and warnings about sources,
citations, etc.
If I'm provided with a gedcom I'll im****t it to a database and then
print out an individual re****t on each person to see what exactly I
want to enter into my main program.
A second benefit is that unless someone wants to do a LOT of typing
I'm unlikely to see my work spread over the internet willy-nilly
without crediting me as the source of the information.
I'll gladly provide info on individuals but balk at providing whole
lines to name collectors.
I'd even go so far as to say that the GEDCOM has done more to hurt
online genealogy than it has to help it as it allows the almost
instantanous transmission of unsourced genealogical garbage and does
too little to encourage sound genealogical research (i.e. mandatory
entry of standard sources and citations).
|
