fyi

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Tim Forsythe <noreply-comment@blogger.com>
Date: Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 6:32 AM
Subject: [Ancestors Now] New comment on Pandora's Box.
To: tjforsythe@gmail.com


Tim Forsythe has left a new comment on your post "Pandora's Box":

I was asked to take a look at the free genealogy application, Gramps, to see how it handled GEDCOM files. Being curious I did a quick test this morning, with my GEDCOM file. The results were not good. I imported my file into Gramps, exported it without any changes, and compared the resulting files.

Here are a few of the major problems I found.

1. The resulting file was not GEDCOM compliant
2. All Multimedia records were thrown away (i.e. OBJE)
3. All user defined records were thrown away (i.e. _NNNN)
4. All embedded notes were converted to linked notes, which in itself is not a problem, but they reused existing note record ids resulting in duplicates, which no application could possibly use.
5. They wrapped all tag data at 80 characters using the CONT tag, unfortunately, GEDCOM does not allow many records to be wrapped like the CAUS and NAME tags, resulting in invalid record fields.
6. Social Security Number tags were thrown away.

The list goes on, but chances are if you tried to import this file into another genealogy program you would get errors and lose data. I reimported the file to Gramps, and as expected, due to duplicate note ids, the wrong notes were linked to individuals, and important data was missing. It did handle the invalid wrapping properly.



Posted by Tim Forsythe to Ancestors Now at January 2, 2012 6:32 AM