TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2003-07 > 1057046294


From:
Subject: [TMG] TMG GEDCOM
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 03:58:23 EDT


Caroline and others have asked why it matters to me that TMG GEDCOM export
amalgamates data from custom source elements?
I am a computer enthusiast. A computer stores, sorts, searches and outputs my
information more efficiently than my brain. But it is only a tool. I have no
loyalty to software and use it only as long as it is of use to me. In a
database I look for stability and for economy of input. I do not like having to
enter the same information in more than one place.
I should indeed like some choice as to how TMG exports source TAGS not
included in the GEDCOM standard. Many genealogy programmes (including TMG) can
handle the import of non standard tags, allowing the user to take decisions as to
their destination field. The current TMG GEDCOM export removes this
possibility. I would hope to preserve as a discreet field, the file reference number in
the source record and to be able to read it on screen in its entirety.
In genealogy I have twice chosen and used excellent software only to find
that it was not further developed, or was (in the case of Generations) bought up
by a commercial competitor. I use few TAGS and ensure that I am not tied to
or trapped in any programme. I close down software not in active use and I
keep many short family files rather than one large project of thousands of names.
I dont use my genealogy software for everything: I use Custodian and Access
to keep genealogical lists and I use Word Documents to list Research Tasks for
each repository.
My main reservations about TMG are 1. It will not allow one to import a
GEDCOM into an existing data set which one has already set up to receive the in
coming source types and fields. 2. As a result, it obliges me to re-edit all my
sources and then fails to preserve all that laborious re-editing in the GEDCOM
source output (though I agree it preserves the actual data entered). In the
meantime I have two files on TMG. It's handling of sources does not fit my
preferred practise but is usable and otherwise it suits me well.. though it tends
to focus my attention on the father of the family. I miss having the wife
alongside and equal to her husband on screen.
Evelyn Wilcock, London
genealogy web site at http://members.aol.com/ECWilcock/

This thread: