From: Benny M. <ben...@gm...> - 2010-11-12 15:01:20
|
2010/11/12 Greg Lamberson <lam...@ya...> > Hi all, > > I am one of the organizers behind BetterGEDCOM, and I actually have been > trying > to join this list for around a month. For some reason my join requests > weren't > doing anything, even though I was watching my email's spam filter carefully > for > some sort of response. Anyway, I'm here now, so what's done is done. > > Several of your members have been taking part in our discussions at > bettergedcom.wikispaces.com, and I thought I would come here and ask a few > questions about your data model and plans to accommodate the Genealogical > Proof > Standard (GPS) put forth by the Board For Certification Of Genealogists as > well > as other ways to embrace theories as opposed to conclusion-based data that > is > the norm in today's genealogy data. > Hi, Gramps works with an internal storage, which is hard to change, and exchange formats, which are handled by plugins and can easily change (Gedcom, gramps-xml) Another exchange format would not be difficult to support, altough the mapping to our own data store might be messy in some cases (as is the case with Gedcom). Gramps now follows the idea of allowing to store every snippet of data you encounter, with most snippets allowing to attach a source to (the evidence). The source reference allows only 5 confidence levels, which is copied from GEDCOM. From what you say I take it you want to extend this more rigorously. I am all in favour, but doing that needs a broad basis, as diverging from GEDCOM is not something many users like. In other words, while extending things, a fallback to Gedcom must be worked out too so as to keep interoperability with those not moving to a new scheme. Some of our members are professional genealogists involved heavily in the > efforts to codify the research process, and one of the long-term goals of > BetterGEDCOM is to embrace the research process by codifying standards for > what > we have been calling the genealogical workspace which would be a software > or > service capable of documenting theory development and the writing of > freeform > theories and proof statements that comply with the best practices of > professional genealogy today. > Nice. Some interesting assertions between information will have to be stored. Main blocker here would be how fine grained the objects are, eg must date of an event have it's own evidence document? Like Gedcom, we now only provide for the entire event to have a source, but that makes proofs harder. > > Please keep in mind that we do not know that it is even possible to > accommodate > the above goal of codifying a genealogical workspace's elements within the > same > data model as one designed for use with today's genealogy software. Our > first > and foremost project is to devise a data model that is capable of mapping > to > today's genealogy software databases. It may be that the mere idea of > theory > development would radically change the structure of the data model, > implying the > software developers would need to change their data models substantially > simply > to be compatible with such concepts, and this we absolutely do not want. > > Your data model is very well developed, and in fact it could be something > our > data model ends up looking very much like. (We have agreed not to _begin_ > with > any previously existing work in our deliberations, no matter the source.) > Our data model has grown from the Gedcom model though, which means it has it's problems. I think you will mainly find that Gedcom has quite some logic behind it :-) Should I start from scratch, I'd have some things which are very different from what Gramps has now. However, I am interested in what you have thought about the research > process. > > Here are some objects that I have clumsily started with: > > Evidence-item=source for most folks > Source in Gramps > Evidence-store = repository. > Repository in Gramps > Assertion=conclusion for most folks > Source Reference in Gramps, it holds 5 levels like Gedcom, which have their own meaning, Very Low = Unreliable or estimated Very High = Direct or primary evidence, dominance of the evidence See http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~pmcbride/gedcom/55gcch2.htm#CERTAINTY_ASSESSMENT The extra fith in Gramps is the one when there is no QUAY tag in Gedcom Theory functions like an intermediate item between evidence-item and > assertion. > Whereas an evidence-item is a thing (like a book or an interview), a Theory > is > an item which provides a way to develop ideas in more free-form fashion. A > Theory in my mind is something cited in an Assertion (conclusion) but is > not > itself equivalent to an assertion. In the same way sources are standalone > items > that exist but are not assertions/conclusions, so are theories. > We have no support for this. I'd need to see practical examples to know what one wants to achieve here. > The names are irrelevant. They're different just to make things a little > separate. Call them George and Sally for all I care. > > Without reproducing several of the discussions over there, I am certainly > interested to see what you guys have to say on issues related to the data > model. > I'll be looking through the archives as well, and I hope you'll come over > there > to help us along with our deliberations even if the issues aren't new to > you > guys. We're building broad-based support, and education is part of the > process. > I'll try to keep an eye on the developments. Should you create a new datamodel, then please, store things as an xml schema, there are great libraries out there to parse xml. Once you have that, Gramps can easily function as a testcase to see how existing Gedcom can move to this format. Benny > > Thanks, and I look forward to your comments. > Greg Lamberson > lam...@ya... > Build A BetterGEDCOM Genealogical Technology Standards Group > http://bettergedcom.wikispaces.com/ > > Lamberson One-name Study > Main website: > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~glamberson/<http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/%7Eglamberson/> > Blog: > http://lambersongenealogy.wordpress.com/ > Twitter: > http://twitter.com/lambersonroots > Genealogy wiki for collaboration: > http://www.werelate.org/wiki/User:Glamberson > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Centralized Desktop Delivery: Dell and VMware Reference Architecture > Simplifying enterprise desktop deployment and management using > Dell EqualLogic storage and VMware View: A highly scalable, end-to-end > client virtualization framework. Read more! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/dell-eql-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Gramps-devel mailing list > Gra...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel > |