|
Interesting Andrew. Not sure I quite agree with the final paragraph though.
I am not convinced that it is fair to criticise GEDCOM for not doing something it was never intended for, It does not store evidence (and by this I take it that you really mean a reference to, or a scan of, evidence, rather than a roll of microfilm or a bound copy of a parish register), but the SOUR element ALLOWS such a reference, while the OBJE records are there to point to any type of file you want; jpeg, mpeg, xls, csv anything you like. True it does NOT include these files within itself, but that is surely unnecessary.
The major problem is not with the file standard, but the IMPLEMENTATIONS of the standard by the various software houses. FTM, for example, complete fails to understand the standard QUAY element. Even worse the premature adoption of GEDCOM 5.5.1 which remains an unapproved DRAFT specification.
I also remain unconvinced that a linear format can not work. I admit that I am going back to the 1990s, but then Monarch was THE tool for extracting data from different database and spreadsheet formats and presenting these in a form acceptable to any other database or spreadsheet; and that used a linear file format very successfully. Expensive, at about £800 IIRC for a single use licence!
Still yours could be an interesting little project, will you please keep us informed?
|
|
Bob is absolutely correct, and that was exactly my point too. Rob is neither dyslexic, nor does he have a poor command of grammar. But, as I politely pointed out, if he wants people to take note of what he says he need to brush up on his presentation skills.
Given his mention of products such as 'Monarch" (which I used for a few short years in B Bank), I suspect that he is actually quite clued up when it comes to database design and management.
Incidentally as a member of many years, those that know me will be aware that I change my name from time to time - nothing underhand just a way of keeping sane,
Bilbo Baggins, Gremlin, Hawkwind, Brinsley S(hwarz) and several others....! including my real name from time to time.
|
|
I will have to take a look at the new GEDCOM specification. I was perhaps referring to the frequent miss use of it actually; in that you are correct.
I have been thinking about the project for a while, and probably wont get chance to make much progress until the Autumn.
Let’s think about the concepts of software, rather than moaning about interfaces.
In my mind there is a list of individuals, individuals undergo various events, some of which are mandatory (birth and death), some of which are voluntary (marriage, divorce, moving house, changing job).
Relationships between those individuals converge (e.g. marriage, births,) or they diverge (brother moves out, sister married into other line, sister dies).
What am I getting at?
The data has inherent relationships, and patterns of relationships, built into it, but needs to be flexible. I haven’t tried to (because I haven’t needed to) create marriages between relatives in GR tree builder. I’m guessing it is impossible, because I am guessing that each person can only have one relationship with another. That is an obvious example, but what about weddings and witnesses – would you not want to record who was there? What about houses, 6 generations lived in the same place, then moved away, and then moved back… some one was boarding – it is all information/data.
I should point out that the idea is not to visualise all the information, but to interrogate it such that the software gives you the answers you want. Who lived here? Did these people work together?
A note about why visualisation doesn’t matter.
The traditional view of a tree is that you have yourself at the bottom, you look up, and see your maternal and paternal lines coming down, and you look down and see all your children and grand children (the roots). Conceptually it makes more sense to turn it upside down actually. And therefore there is one tree for one family… however, that tree only works for you – it has you at the centre. Therefore everyone has a tree, because the tree is the representation of relationships between them and other people in that tree.
|
|
SHRat
Take it you do some sort IT support then?
Perhaps we are all dixlesik just a bit. Seriously though, I have great difficulty typing ptoperly. My fingers seem to want to hit the key to ine side of the letter I want. Not joking, it is real hard work to correct things.
Been thinking. Not too keen on Hawkwind, Got a message today which said "Dear Hawk" Didn't quite ring properly.
Apart from "Silver Machine", most of what they did was nothing more than a big dirge. Their 'Dancer' Stacia came on stage with a bottle of Vodka which she drank during the band's performance. and cavorted on the floor whilst flashing bits your mother would be too ashamed to mention.
The Grateful Dead were a much better band. Yup, Jerry G sounds good. I'll try that for a while.
PS G.D. did a number called Wharf Rat. Perhaps you could be WHRat.
|
