Bienvenue, Invité
Nom d'utilisateur : Mot de passe :


Please do NOT post requests for help here. Use the Help forum for that.

SUJET : GEDCOM 5.5.5 spec released

GEDCOM 5.5.5 spec released il y a 1 mois 1 semaine #1

  • ungeahnt
  • Portrait de ungeahnt
  • Hors Ligne
  • New
  • Messages : 54
FYI: a new GEDCOM specification was released on October 2nd by gedcom.org: GEDCOM 5.5.5

Gedcom.org press release as PDF
Dieter
Schmidt ⚭ Schwab (Sudetenland) | Hauer ⚭ Bühler (Bayern / BW) | Маринов ⚭ Шаламанова (BG)
webtrees 1.7.14 | PHP 7.3.0 | MySQL 5.6.42 | Apache 2.4.37 | SunOS 5.10
L'administrateur a désactivé l'accès en écriture pour le public.

GEDCOM 5.5.5 spec released il y a 1 mois 1 semaine #2

  • ungeahnt
  • Portrait de ungeahnt
  • Hors Ligne
  • New
  • Messages : 54
Dieter
Schmidt ⚭ Schwab (Sudetenland) | Hauer ⚭ Bühler (Bayern / BW) | Маринов ⚭ Шаламанова (BG)
webtrees 1.7.14 | PHP 7.3.0 | MySQL 5.6.42 | Apache 2.4.37 | SunOS 5.10
Dernière édition: il y a 1 mois 5 jours par ungeahnt. Raison: editor note changed
L'administrateur a désactivé l'accès en écriture pour le public.

GEDCOM 5.5.5 spec released il y a 1 mois 1 semaine #3

  • fisharebest
  • Portrait de fisharebest
  • en ligne
  • Administrator
  • Messages : 11612
Oooh. Very interesting....
Greg Roach - Cette adresse e-mail est protégée contre les robots spammeurs. Vous devez activer le JavaScript pour la visualiser. - fisharebest.webtrees.net
L'administrateur a désactivé l'accès en écriture pour le public.

GEDCOM 5.5.5 spec released il y a 1 mois 1 semaine #4

  • fisharebest
  • Portrait de fisharebest
  • en ligne
  • Administrator
  • Messages : 11612
The changes to FAM records would cause lots of problems for webtrees.

It says that if a couple have two relationships (marriage, divorce, remarriage), then we must have two FAM records.

Children must be linked to the correct FAM record. If you do not know the dates, then you cannot connect the child to the correct family.

If I understand correctly, it also says that each "relationship" (not married, living together, marriage) is also a separate FAM record.

So, if a couple

1) have a relationship (not married)
2) have a child
3) have a new relationship (living together)
4) have a child
5) have a new relationship (get married)
6) have a child

then we must create three separate FAM records, each with one child.
Greg Roach - Cette adresse e-mail est protégée contre les robots spammeurs. Vous devez activer le JavaScript pour la visualiser. - fisharebest.webtrees.net
L'administrateur a désactivé l'accès en écriture pour le public.

GEDCOM 5.5.5 spec released il y a 1 mois 1 semaine #5

  • fisharebest
  • Portrait de fisharebest
  • en ligne
  • Administrator
  • Messages : 11612
It also removes support for media objects that contain more than one media file.

webtrees 2.0 adds support for this feature...

A typical use will be a document with two sides. When we scan it, we will have two JPEG files.
But there will be one title, one transcript, one set of notes, etc.
Greg Roach - Cette adresse e-mail est protégée contre les robots spammeurs. Vous devez activer le JavaScript pour la visualiser. - fisharebest.webtrees.net
L'administrateur a désactivé l'accès en écriture pour le public.

GEDCOM 5.5.5 spec released il y a 1 mois 1 semaine #6

  • thomas52
  • Portrait de thomas52
  • en ligne
  • Frequent
  • Western North Carolina
  • Messages : 843
Have they provided for people who "feel like" a different gender, or other options? (Good Grief!)
Let's skip this one, and wait for the next model. Maybe they will have returned to earth by then.
"Failure is an amazing teacher." (L'échec est un professeur extraordinaire.)
L'administrateur a désactivé l'accès en écriture pour le public.

GEDCOM 5.5.5 spec released il y a 1 mois 1 semaine #7

  • Peter_S
  • Portrait de Peter_S
  • Hors Ligne
  • Junior
  • Messages : 116
The release of the new GEDCOM Standard 5.5.5 seems to be the creation of a single person - Tamura Jones, a Dutch genealogy blogger. It remains to be seen how far this version will establish itself, as there is no major genealogy program behind it yet.

Best regards
Peter
webtrees 1.7.14
PHP 7.3.1, MySQL 5.6.38
Webhosting: all-inkl.com
L'administrateur a désactivé l'accès en écriture pour le public.

GEDCOM 5.5.5 spec released il y a 1 mois 1 semaine #8

  • fisharebest
  • Portrait de fisharebest
  • en ligne
  • Administrator
  • Messages : 11612
@thomas - there is an ISO standard (ISO 5218) for "human sexes", which gives 4 values. Male, Female, Unknown, Intersex.
webtrees is designed to handle these 4 values - and enabling the "X" value is trivial.

Whether we call it "Intersex" or just "Other" is not that important. We only use it to choose relationship names (brother, sister, sibling), pronouns (he, she, they), and the colour of chart boxes. "X" gets treated the same as "U". So, you get "sibling", "parent", etc.

The 5.5.5 spec also introduces "N" (not specified) - but I fail to see how this differs from "U".


IMHO, it would have been more helpful to allow more than one SEX record,. This would cover transgender individuals. e.g. something like this.

1 SEX M
2 TYPE birth
1 SEX F
2 TYPE change
3 DATE ...


The 5.5.5 spec provides support for same-sex relationships - using the same technique used by webtrees. i.e. HUSB/WIFE are just internal labels, and the INDI.SEX alone is used to determine sex.
Greg Roach - Cette adresse e-mail est protégée contre les robots spammeurs. Vous devez activer le JavaScript pour la visualiser. - fisharebest.webtrees.net
L'administrateur a désactivé l'accès en écriture pour le public.
Avez-vous besoin d'une solution d'hébergement web pour votre site webtrees ?
Si vous préférez un hébergeur spécialisé de webtrees, la page suivante en liste quelques-uns capables de vous offrir ce type de service :

GEDCOM 5.5.5 spec released il y a 1 mois 1 semaine #9

  • norwegian_sardines
  • Portrait de norwegian_sardines
  • Hors Ligne
  • Gold
  • Messages : 1537
I've been looking at and trying to digest a few of the changes issued in the GEDCOM 5.5.5 update as offered by Mr. Jones and "GEDCOM.org"

It is indicated that the revision is a "clean up" of some issues with 5.5.1 and I could be on board with some of the clean up.

HOWEVER.....

The following statement contains bad logic and I reject the conclusion:
<CHILD_LINKAGE_STATUS>
The <CHILD_LINKAGE_STATUS> is not supported by any major applications, and quite possibly by no application at all. It has been marked obsolete in the GEDCOM 5.5.1 Annotated Edition, and removed from GEDCOM 5.5.5. As a result, the STAT tag is obsolete too, no longer used and has been removed from Appendix A.

Just because no software program uses a particular tag does not indicate that it should be removed. Programs need to use the standard NOT avoid it.

The Jones document ” GEDCOM 5.5.1 Annotated Edition “ indicates the following:
lineage status
The <CHILD_LINKAGE_STATUS> feature is arguably bad design; an application that fails
to support this feature will simply interpret a child-family link as a child-family link, even when
it is “disproven”.

While I agree that this may (or may not) be the best design, saying that a program that does not support the tag because it will interpret the FAMC indicator incorrectly justified the removal of the tag and is a failed argument, also the document does not in any way offer an alternative for indicating proven or "in question" family linkage assertions. As a historian/researcher I use GEDCOM to record information about potential links as well a proven links. This is an important indication of those possibilities. If a program does not support the tag (thus presenting an error) it is not the fault of the underlying GEDCOM design but that of the program without support.

I also disagree with the argument against the terms “proven/disproven”, suggesting that DNA is the only way that these words can and should be used. As noted:
The usage of the words “proven” and “disproven” for official and legal genealogy is seriously bad practice, sadly still actively promoted by some individuals and organisations. It is best to reserve these words for actual proof, like DNA tests for biological genealogy, and not use them carelessly in a way that dilutes their meaning this much.

Historically (before DNA was invented) what other terms can we use to indicate that “proof” has been obtain the family connection was or was not made? No alternative was given and therefore a standard (or deprecation of a term) can not be presented. If an individual was part of a family history book and thought to be inclusive within a particular family, as a historian, if I found evidence that made the assertion very clear (without much doubt) that this was not the case I would want to document the false assertion for future readers of my work so that they had evidence that other assertions were (or could be incorrect). Genealogy can and should be about correcting history as well as recording history.
Ken
L'administrateur a désactivé l'accès en écriture pour le public.

GEDCOM 5.5.5 spec released il y a 1 mois 1 semaine #10

  • norwegian_sardines
  • Portrait de norwegian_sardines
  • Hors Ligne
  • Gold
  • Messages : 1537
As with Greg's note I don't see the value of the "U" vs "N".

In the " GEDCOM 5.5.1 Annotated Edition" it was stated"
SEX_VALUE:=
A code that indicates the sex of the individual:
= Male
= Female
= Undetermined from available records and quite sure that it can’t be.

<SEX_VALUE>
An additional sex value has come to be used since this specification was created. Genealogy
applications must allow users to enter, and their GEDCOM readers must accept one additional
sex value; X for intersex.

In the v5.5.5 document the following value and definition was added:
Added N, meaning Not recorded as a possible <SEX_VALUE>
The above term definitions "Not recorded" and "undetermined from available records" seem to me to be the same. Without a better understanding of the real difference these two terms are misleading
Ken
Dernière édition: il y a 1 mois 1 semaine par norwegian_sardines. Raison: added document name.
L'administrateur a désactivé l'accès en écriture pour le public.

GEDCOM 5.5.5 spec released il y a 1 mois 1 semaine #11

  • ungeahnt
  • Portrait de ungeahnt
  • Hors Ligne
  • New
  • Messages : 54
Peter_S écrit:
The release of the new GEDCOM Standard 5.5.5 seems to be the creation of a single person - Tamura Jones, a Dutch genealogy blogger.
Hmm, at first view I've thought that it's an official release by LDS church. On second view - you're right - "tripple5" is a one man show, but its not clear if there are other people behind it.
The "gedcom.org" domain is no longer owned by the LDS church. Instead it was bought by Myheritage CEO (see press release).

Peter_S écrit:
It remains to be seen how far this version will establish itself, as there is no major genealogy program behind it yet.
yes!
Dieter
Schmidt ⚭ Schwab (Sudetenland) | Hauer ⚭ Bühler (Bayern / BW) | Маринов ⚭ Шаламанова (BG)
webtrees 1.7.14 | PHP 7.3.0 | MySQL 5.6.42 | Apache 2.4.37 | SunOS 5.10
L'administrateur a désactivé l'accès en écriture pour le public.

GEDCOM 5.5.5 spec released il y a 1 mois 5 jours #12

  • ungeahnt
  • Portrait de ungeahnt
  • Hors Ligne
  • New
  • Messages : 54
Dieter
Schmidt ⚭ Schwab (Sudetenland) | Hauer ⚭ Bühler (Bayern / BW) | Маринов ⚭ Шаламанова (BG)
webtrees 1.7.14 | PHP 7.3.0 | MySQL 5.6.42 | Apache 2.4.37 | SunOS 5.10
L'administrateur a désactivé l'accès en écriture pour le public.

GEDCOM 5.5.5 spec released il y a 1 mois 3 jours #13

  • ungeahnt
  • Portrait de ungeahnt
  • Hors Ligne
  • New
  • Messages : 54
fisharebest écrit:
@thomas - there is an ISO standard (ISO 5218) for "human sexes", which gives 4 values. Male, Female, Unknown, Intersex.
Greg, I'm agree with you that X (=intersex) should be introduced to GEDCOM (and the combination with a date would be a very good solution).

But I think the "X" is not a part of the valid ISO5218:2004 standard (official public download). Strictly speaking the ISO uses only numbers and avoid deliberately the use of letters. There exists:
  • Not known 0 (zero)
  • Male 1 (one)
  • Female 2 (two)
  • Not applicable 9 (nine)
As you write you could use "Not applicable" as "X" but I wanted to clarify that ISO handles the topic a little bit different. Maybe they are behind the latest jurisprudence, because - as far as I know - "not applicable" will not be accepted as a "3rd sex" by different constitutional courts. Therefore I can imagine that "intersex" will be added (e.g. as number "3") to the four exiting items (between '2 - Female' and '9-Not applicable' you have enough digits for it) ;) So if you reference to ISO, keep this in mind.

There are other standards (like ANSI ASC X12) that use "X", but not ISO.
Dieter
Schmidt ⚭ Schwab (Sudetenland) | Hauer ⚭ Bühler (Bayern / BW) | Маринов ⚭ Шаламанова (BG)
webtrees 1.7.14 | PHP 7.3.0 | MySQL 5.6.42 | Apache 2.4.37 | SunOS 5.10
L'administrateur a désactivé l'accès en écriture pour le public.

GEDCOM 5.5.5 spec released il y a 4 jours 6 heures #14

  • WGroleau
  • Portrait de WGroleau
  • Hors Ligne
  • Gold
  • Messages : 1528
ungeahnt écrit: How seriously can I take an article by someone who writes that genealogists in 1999 were not interested in citing sources?
--
Wes Groleau
UniGen.us/
PHP 7.2.15; MySQL 5.6.40; Apache
L'administrateur a désactivé l'accès en écriture pour le public.

GEDCOM 5.5.5 spec released il y a 4 jours 4 heures #15

  • kevyNC
  • Portrait de kevyNC
  • Hors Ligne
  • New
  • Messages : 23
How seriously can I take an article by someone who writes that genealogists in 1999 were not interested in citing sources?

Fair point -- have to wonder if this might relate to the pot roast
L'administrateur a désactivé l'accès en écriture pour le public.
Propulsé par Kunena