TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2002-02 > 1012957539


From: Lee Hoffman <>
Subject: RE: [TMG] Long discourse on GEDCOM and witness data
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 20:05:39 -0500
References: <4.2.2.20020205150404.013503b0@pop3.norton.antivirus>
In-Reply-To: <HPEEJIONNHNPICICNHOECEOKPNAA.rdamon@beltronicsinc.com>


Richard Damon wrote:
> > >Intermediate output level would output a tag for every Key
> > Participant. Thus
> > >a census tag could exist once in TMG and generate multiple tags
> > in GEDCOM.
> > >The event-type definition would need to indicate if the tag should be put
> > >into a family if it exists, or possible create a family (like a marriage
> > >group tag). Otherwise tags would not be linked together as GEDCOM has no
> > >support for this. An enhancement might be to allow specifying differing
> > >GEDCOM output tags for each role. Non-key participants (like Witnesses)
> > >would be ignored.
> >
> > This may be done in TMG now.
>
>This can not be done now. This was for all Key-Participants, which can
>include non-principals. Currently TMG can only generate a GEDCOM tag for the
>principals of an event.

This is true. Since by my reading of your statement "Non-key participants
(like Witnesses)
would be ignored", Witnesses are not key-participants. This leaves only
the Principal(s) [one or two persons]. Thus this _may_ be done now. All
that is necessary is to go into the appropriate Report Definition screen
and de-select any tags not desired. Custom Tags may be created as desired
and the appropriate GEDCOM tag specified.

>For example, Joe and his wife and 2 kids as well as his brother immigrate to
>America. I can create one Immigration tag in TMG and attach the whole group
>to it. TMG at best will make the tag a family tag and leave the brother in
>the old world. If we give each person their own immigration tag we at least
>preserve the fact they immigrated to America, we just lose the fact they
>came together.

Unless something is entered into each Tag Memo saying something like: "came
with wife, chidlren (X and Y), and his brother" or as appropriate.

>Yes I could give each person their own tag in TMG but then I
>lose the information in TMG that they traveled together, or I need to have
>redundant tags in TMG (and redundancy invites error).

No argument here, although Copy/Paste can help reduce it.

> > >Advanced output level (if implemented) would output a tag for every
> > >participant (for non-key participants it would likely be just a
> > note) with a
> > >note attached with a sentence built like a report.
> >
> > This may be done in TMG now if the _user_ enters the information into Tag
> > Memo fields. Bob Velke has specifically stated that he does not plan to
> > create narrative data for placement into GEDCOM as he feels that
> > this would
> > reduce the integrity of the data. But if the user entered the narrative
> > data, then the integrity theoretically would not be reduced. (I say
> > "theoretically" because of (1) entry error and (2) how another program
> > interprets the data (_if_ it does).
> >
>
>I understand Bob position (which is why I conditioned the level) but I
>disagree with him. To do this now in TMG requires, again, redundant tags as
>the note may be different for each participant, and the people most in need
>of the memo are not outputted currently. It may be possible to write a
>utility like John's to do this but as it requires information saved about
>each role of every tag type it would be much more convenient if it were
>built in.

Something I did not mention before is that, yes, TMG can be modified to do
anything you want -- even to the point of following the GEDCOM
"standard". Now, does that mean the importing program will follow the
"standard"? Does it mean that the importing program will place the data in
a proper field? The answer is most likely "no" for at least one if not
both questions. Thus nothing is gained anyway.

In any case, Bob has spoken. He will _not_ compromise data. What a user
does is not his fault, but he will not purposely cause errors. That data
is not output GEDCOM because a user decided to use the capabilities of TMG
that won't export to GEDCOM also is not his fault. That capability was
requested and he was able to provide it _without_ compromising data
integrity although a user can.

If you have ever seen a GEDCOM with place information in date fields, notes
in place field, and myriad other errors, then you will understand the
frustration as to what goes where, what data is right, etc. In most
cases, the problem was not the fault of the program but of the user placing
data in inappropriate places. But more likely, the program did not test
the data and warn the user that it was inappropriate.

----------
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: