Oh, I did not know that FS was still into a real 'sandbox' process!!!

http://broadcast.lds.org/elearning/fhd/Community/en/FamilyTreeCurriculum/index.html


Le mar. 8 avril 2014 at 17:04, Jerome <romjerome@yahoo.fr> a écrit :
If FamilySearch starts to (re-)use Source 'sand' Boxes (alternate sources?), then this will be even more fun! :-/

https://getsatisfaction.com/familysearch/topics/migrating_nfs_sources_to_family_tree_has_started
http://www.ancestryinsider.org/2014/04/familysearch-migrates-new-familysearch.html
https://www.gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php?title=Citation_examples:FamilySearch
https://getsatisfaction.com/familysearch/searches?query=source

Le dim. 6 avril 2014 at 22:49, Enno Borgsteede <ennoborg@gmail.com> a écrit :
Devs,
It certainly needs discussion. The source styling is nice, but how to integrate it is the problematic thing. The discussion on what default styles to have also did not lead to a resolution. More a wait and see resolution it seemed to me. Wait and see what the developers present, and then post remarks.
H'm, knowing this, wouldn't it be safe to conclude that EE style templates are practically dead? They were implemented in a couple of programs, where I assume some genealogists actually use them, but outside the manufacturers, and those hidden users, I see absolutely noone putting any effort in actually implementing them. What I mean is that I see no support for templates on any major site on the web, no action from FHISO, nothing substantial on GedcomX, and the one commercial product that was supposed to create a template based exchange, i.e. AncestorSync gone too. The company site still exists, but the product domain only creates warning in Chrome and Firefox, and SourceTemplates.org is gone too. In other words, there is no money to be made, because noone is interested enough to pay, nor to contribute on FHISO and GedcomX. Apparently, there's not much gain anywhere. And IMO, the reason is simple, EE templates are based on the false assumption that the process can be controlled top down, with a bureaucracy so large, that noone listens to it anymore. John Yates last updated his evidence style page 4 years ago, so what are we discussing here? The Walking Dead?
The aid to users to create good sources is a plus also, but again, the GUI integration is a point of debate. With the source editor separate from citations, this could be more nicely done now I think.
Creating good sources is nice, and I still wish for better support for that in Gramps, but I really don't see how it can be done with an EE based template set. It is too large, not compatible with local sites, and close to impossible to translate and maintain. Do you really think it makes sense to update templates whenever any local site, in any of the countries where Gramps users live, adds another field, and if so, who do you think will really bother distributing those? I won't.
Whatever is done, starting point is merging master into the branch. As Tim indicates database change collisions, it will not be easy to merge. It need also not be a 100% story. One could make sure the foundations are present in 4.1, without the user visible stuff. It depends on Tim though. He changed so much of my original push it's more his code than mine, so I feel he should do the merge. With the changes in master, it might be even be simpler to just start a new branch, and cherry pick the changes from the old branch as needed, rewriting the GUI parts from scratch.
As far as I'm concerned, this makes no sense, unless the code adapts to that little thing that may be visible in GedcomX right now, which is a simple source architecture, multi level, like Nick wrote, with support for the existing source/citation data that we have in Gramps and GEDCOM now. Anything else looks like a waste of time to me, because effectively, the whole template crap would just create another vendor lock-in like the one described by Tamura Jones: http://www.tamurajones.net/GenealogyCitationStandard.xhtml The article is almost 5 years old, and still valid today. In essence, I still think that it's not that difficult to identify and cite a source with a reasonable number of elements/parameters, like it is expressed by Tony Proctor here http://www.familyhistorydata.parallaxview.co/home/document-structure/citation or by GedcomX, whenever they wake up. cheers, Enno ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Gramps-devel mailing list Gramps-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel