TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2002-02 > 1012768684


From: "F. Langset" <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] Long discourse on GEDCOM and witness data
Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2002 21:38:50 +0100
References: <3C5D63F1.20828.1165350@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20020203114439.013f8f00@pop3.norton.antivirus>


-----
Ref: Lee Hoffman, 3 Feb 2002 12:01, "Re: [TMG] Long discourse on
GEDCOM ":
-----

Hi Lee,

My QWERTY scares me, it drags me by my fingers ;]

[clipped]
> However, you can have it both ways. This requires redundant entry of
> data. You would enter Witnesses in the normal TMG Witnesses section
> of a tag. Then you would enter the data in a different tag (could be
> a Custom tag) and mark the Tag Sentence of that tag such that it will
> never print and/or de-select that tag in the Report Definition. Then
> when you generated a GEDCOM, you would specifically select that tag
> for export.

So, a new option 4, a combination of option 1 and 2.
Ok: Now you have created all the census tags (say 100) with all the
witnesses, and you have also created all the custom tags (say census-
ged) for each individual connected to those census tags (500? 1000?).
While you are in the kitchen making a cup of coffee, I walk in
another door and delete one of the census tags. Your job is now to
enforce data integrity (I want you to show me exactely how you found
what tags to delete). 8) Redundancy (uncontrolled) scares me.

Still going for option 1. And now quitting GEDCOM-discussion for good
(I think)

Regards,
Frode Langset
Norway
----
P.S. If this didn't make any sense: Print it out and
throw it in the waste basket, then give me a notice.

This thread: