No, it's nowhere near that easy. A record holds information which may or may not be correct and may or
may not pertain to the person whom you're researching. The information must be carefully analyzed both
in the context of the document or artifact which contains it and in the context of all of the other relevant
information found in other documents and artifacts discovered by a thorough search. If you haven't done
so already, I urge you to study the subject. I'm afraid that I'm familiar only with the American literature on
the subject, the most important books of which are:
Elizabeth Shown Mills, "Evidence Explained: Citing History Sources from Artifacts to Cyberspace",
ISBN 978-0806318066, and "Evidence! Citation and Analysis for the Family Historian", ISBN 978-0806315430
The former is an expanded version of the latter most of which is detailed explanations of how to write citations
for a wide variety of source documents and artifacts. It's also quite a bit more expensive, so I suggest "Evidence!".
There's a new book,
Thomas W. Jones, "Mastering Genealogical Proof", ISBN 978-1935815075, which was released two weeks ago
at the (American) National Genealogical Society's Family History Conference, but it seems to be available only
through the society (www.ngsgenealogy.org
). It's more of a tutorial than are Mills's books, and also a bit wider-
ranging, covering the whole process from search to writing the final proof argument.
A third, not yet published, is
Robert Charles Anderson, "Elements of Genealogical Analysis", will present a somewhat different process similar
to what we've been calling n-tier in the GedcomX discussions. Anderson presented a summary of the book at the
conference two weeks ago. He expects that it will be released sometime this fall by the New England Historic
No, analysis documents are subject to constant revision as the researcher discovers new evidence. Ease of editing
We already parse the links in Notes; otherwise they wouldn't work. If we have extracted-evidence objects like personas
we can scan the Notes objects for links: If a link to a persona appears in a Note attached to a person then the scanner
will know that that persona is accounted for and shouldn't be flagged for review. If the reference gets removed in a
later revision of the Note, a subsequent run of the scanner will flag it.
I doubt that anyone likely to contribute to Gramps has the knowledge necessary to write a (multi-lingual!) natural
language processor capable of understanding an analysis, and I don't think the state of the art in artificial intelligence
is yet capable of constructing one.
Gramps is already a pretty big plate of that! :-( Since we already have a class which provides text with links to other
objects, what would be gained by adding another?