TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2000-12 > 0975785541


From: Lee Hoffman/KY <>
Subject: RE: [TMG] GEDCOM (was ROOTSWEB)
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 14:32:21 -0500
References: <4.1.20001202115829.01cc2640@pop.mis.net>
In-Reply-To: <LOBBKOOEANNIIOJMJAELKEOCCIAA.earbar@netway.com>


beth wrote:
>I'm not seeing your point here;
>
>> But TMG translates the Sentence Structure based on the context of the
>> report. This is the same problem with displaying a preview of
>> the sentence
>> in the tag. There are too many possible ways the sentence could be
>> translated. Of course, it could translate the Sentence and then display
>> (export in the above case) all the possible translations -- but it would
>> sure slow down the program and the user probably would not
>> benefit anyway.
>
>How is building a sentence for a GEDCOM functionally different from
>building that same sentence for a report? TMG knows the context (focus
>person and tag) either way, doesn't it?

But GEDCOM is not the same as the Descendants Indented Narrative, the
Descendants Narrative (Journal), or the corresponding Ancestors reports, or
the Individual Narrative report each of which requires different
editing/printing of the Sentence. Also the Sentence may be printed
differently when multiple persons (Principals or Witnesses) are present.

In GEDCOM, the only multiple person events allowed are those of a family
nature (marriage, divorce, etc). In GEDCOM, Witnesses are not considered.

There are other shortcomings of GEDCOM. In general, I consider the only
decent GEDCOM is one that contains names, sex, and birth, marriage, death,
burial dates and places with occasional notes. Almost anything else may be
lost going from one program to another. This is a little more extreme than
reality, but not much. GEDCOM is just not reliable for data exchange.

There are various reasons for this, such as that the "standard" is very
ambiguous. Partly this is due to the terms that are used. These terms are
everyday ones used by everyone in genealogy and everyone knows what they
mean. The problem is that if you have ask half a dozen people to define a
genealogical term, ty\\you will very likely get six different definitions.
They may be much alike in the general sense, but the details will make them
different. A computer cannot "think" in general terms and thus when
someone implements the GEDCOM "standard" in a program, the implementation
is based on the terms as understood by the programmer.

In addition to the terms being ambiguous, the "standard" is loosely written
such that the meaning of a specification is not specific. An example of
this is that some programs are still using an older version of GEDCOM that
confused how alternate names would be treated. The current version
specifically says that the Primary Name (using TMG terms here) is the first
encountered in a GEDCOM file and non-Primary Names would be any other names
encountered. Some programs consider the Primary Name to the last
enountered - just the reverse of the current version of GEDCOM.




----------
Lee Hoffman/KY
E-mail:
TMG Tips: <http://www.tmgtips.com>;
My website: <http://www.tmgtips.com/lhoffman>;
--------------
A user of the best genealogy program, The Master Genealogist (TMG)

This thread: