TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2004-03 > 1078426605


From: "Gregory Winters" <>
Subject: RE: [TMG] Re: FTM Import and Footnotes - Just Footnotes
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 13:57:16 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20043413338.994002@TERRY2>


Thanks, Terry. What you're saying (in effect) is that this type of data is
not standardized the way that other elements of a record are (e.g., Name,
Birth, etc.) I guess we need to push for its inclusion into the GEDCOM
schema. As I mentioned before, a footnote is a critical and completely
valid reporting element. Not allowing for footnotes - either their
creation, display, importing, or exporting - is the same (to me) as not
allowing for capital letters on Names.

Greg

-----Original Message-----
From: Terry Reigel [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 1:33 PM
To:
Subject: RE: [TMG] Re: FTM Import and Footnotes - Just Footnotes

On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 13:01:16 -0500, Gregory Winters wrote:
> Terry:
>
> You and Jim Byram have detailed approaches to create these footnotes
> (which I am going to try out using various reports). What will these
> workarounds look like in a GEDCOM export? As I mentioned in a
> previous note, I would have to have to go through this all over again
> with a third product. Thanks.
>
Greg,

Without testing, I believe the pseudo-source will export to GEDCOM, but will
look like a source citation. Not sure what it would look like on import - I
suppose that depends on the importing application.

I'd think the memo approach would export provided the tag type was one in
which the GEDCOM spec expected a memo output. Import results again depend on
what the importing application did with that tag type.

I'd guess neither is likely to look after import as it did in TMG, though I
guess that the pseudo-source approach might have a better chance.

Terry






==== TMG Mailing List ====
Send all messages and replies to <>.

This thread: