#59 Invalid GEDCOM File with a Note

closed-fixed
Nils Meier
Gedcom (21)
5
2004-12-31
2004-12-15
Philippe Bouvart
No

I've created a Note in a familly and then the GEDCOM
File saved became invalid and GenJ was unable to
re-read it.

The file with a "~" was invalid too.

0 @F015@ FAM
1 HUSB @I035@
1 WIFE @I036@
1 CHIL @I11@
1 MARR
2 DATE
2 PLAC
1 CHAN
2 DATE 11 DEC 2004
3 TIME 13:35:07
1 @FAM
2 MARR
3 NOTE Enfant illégitime

I've deleted the last three lines and then GenJ was
able to read it.

3 consequences :
1/ We must correct it.
2/ We should save the last file that was loaded
successfully.
3/ We should ignore such problem and try to load much
datas as possible or load the backup file.

Discussion

  • Nils Meier
    Nils Meier
    2004-12-16

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=118458

    Thanks for reporting this - can you reproduce the problem?

    I've just tried to attach a note to a FAM and it saves that
    information correctly here. I'll do some more testing though.

    About the ~ file - GenJ always keeps the last file as a
    backup so I'm not sure why both .ged and .ged~ where showing
    up wrong.

     
  • Logged In: YES
    user_id=439597

    2 Comments :
    1/ I'm sorry. I was wrong. That's not in the comment but in
    the top left field of the edit view of the fammilly just
    after the "Marriage" label.

    2/ I'm sure that the "~" file was invalid too.
    It's because i've save the GEDCOM file twice before leaving
    GenJ.
    That's why i think that you should save the files that were
    loaded successfully (maybe in a "~~" file ?!) at the startup.

     
  • Nils Meier
    Nils Meier
    2004-12-17

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=118458

    hmm, if you can possibly provide steps on how to reproduce
    this that would be great. Everything seems to work as
    intended here.

    Regarding the backup - GenJ keeps the last saved file as ~
    so that in case of a crash the user can recover the last
    file (loading it on the next startup would tell the user
    that something's wrong). I agree that in that case GenJ
    could ask the user whether he wants to read the backup. But
    that seems low priority because the user can do that himself.

    I don't think we have to think anything about that - GenJ is
    not supposed to silently write wrong information (also twice
    as in your case). So lets fix the bug if identified and talk
    about other backup-schemes and strategies elsewhere.

    Nils

     
    • status: open --> closed-fixed