GEDCOM category? (sorry not a new idea really and mostly just expressing my opinion with references)
"A long time ago in a galaxy ..." ... a planet ...
... Welcome to the GEDCOM wars ... er debate ... um ...
There are FamilySearch Community members with strong opinions about GEDCOM being continued, being discontinued, ... etc.
I am just wondering if these 'discussions' could be given their own category (please)?
I feel that would be preferable considering the foundational nature of the data structure.
GEDCOM := GEnealogical Data COMmunications: a file specification or data structure developed long ago (but within my lifetime) for exchanging genealogical data between computers (invented by predecessors of the current FamilySearch ...) ... and which even now is very foundational to FamilySearch Family Tree.
As such it is a tool. I view all tools as helpful - if I learn how to use them well ...
As noted - in the above GEDCOM link - the current released specification/version is dated 2021-6-7 (last June). I do not feel that FamilySearch will be abandoning this specification. In fact it appears to be continuing to be developed and refined.
Genealogies (opinion):
Requests to abandon GEDCOM uploads I believe are short-sighted. The simplest method of creating a family tree - is probably a piece of paper and pencil. The next simplest is probably using genealogy family group sheets (of which there exists a whole collection submitted by past GSU/FamilySearch patrons). The next simplest - if one has a computer - is probably using family tree management solutions - which have the capability of saving files in GEDCOM format (those in the previous link are approved/compatible with FamilySearch Family Tree).
Hopefully the picture is becoming clear. Having GEDCOM accessible and usable is very desirable - even foundational to FamilySearch Family Tree. Think about internationally ...
Anyway, I still like the capability to upload a GEDCOM to FamilySearch (note the parts of GEDCOM that are not included in PRF) - even if I don't or wouldn't try to match it with Family Tree (as a backup for preservation - though it is unclear whether sources are uploaded and just not displayed). I submit this opinion respectfully - in favor of FamilySearch's continued development and hope for its continued success.
Comments
-
FYI
It's 'Brett'.
Just in passing ...
It certainly would be good, if there was SEPARATE 'Category', for GEDCOM File related matters, under 'FamilySearch Help', in this "Community.FamilySearch" Forum.
Unfortunately ...
I do not think, that the 'powers to be', would agree with us.
As, they may consider, that there are ALREADY ... too MANY 'Categories' ... as it is ...
As an aside ...
IF, not a 'Category', under "FamilySearch Help"; THEN, what about a 'Group', under the "Groups" Section.
That may be workable ...
Just a thought.
Brett
0 -
A GEDCOM Group might be a resource if users had specific GEDCOM questions (a group lead by GEDCOM experts - which by the way - I don't claim to be an expert at anything. My purpose in this post is mainly/hopefully educational - users need to understand what GEDCOM is ... ). But I don't think a Group would be a good place for all GEDCOM discussions.
I do believe it is best if Community structure kind of follows the site/webapp structure. Search> Genealogies is where GEDCOM uploads take place - so GEDCOM under Search, Family Tree (as discussed is overlaying GEDCOM 7.0.7 - or whatever version FamilySearch is currently at) - so GEDCOM under Family Tree, but it is also in Records, Images, Catalogue, Books, Memories and Temple Ordinances (I may have left something out... I don't know about indexed records representation) - so GEDCOM is literally foundational to all of FamilySearch (if I am reading the specification rightly. Not that I know such is the case but the specification sure seems to be indicating such). So where to put it ... I don't know - how about its own Category - that way it would be kind of off by itself? I guess technically it already is: https://gedcom.io/community/ - but that is for the technical/developer community - what about here in FamilySearch Community?
Look ... I guess pretty much every question asked in Community could be translated into GEDCOMese - meaning the user concern could be a question about GEDCOM - and the answer could be a request for change/comment about the current version. I don't think that is what Community here is meant to be necessarily. But if we all knew GEDCOMese - it wouldn't be a problem...
Not all concerns require such a technical focus - maybe I shouldn't have brought it up ... but at least the Community can be informed if they want to learn/ask technical questions there is a resource to do so.
0 -
I favor GEDCOM files being uploaded to the Genealogies section of FamilySearch, but not the "main tree."
This would preserve the uploaders tree as it is.
Allow others to search for additional persons, sources, research conflicting info and build upon the main tree.
Avoid duplicate and unsourced persons to be "automatically" added.
1 -
You might not be aware, but the GEDCOM 7.0 standard was published in July 2021. GEDCOM is not a program, it is a standard way of exchanging data between different genealogy programs. There is a website, GEDCOM.io that explains what it is and how it works. The issue is not with GEDCOM at all, it is with the users who disregard the rule that they review their file before uploading. One way of minimizing the impact of any changes in the FamilySearch Family Tree is to have your own mirror copy of those parts of the Family Tree you are interested in. I suggest Ancestry or MyHeritage as alternatives. You can then have what you believe to be a "correct" copy of the data on hand to compare and make any corrections. The debate about changes to the Family Tree will likely continue as long as people can make changes, but there are ways to minimize the damage done by inaccurate changes. I have several videos on the subject on the BYU Family History Library YouTube Channel. I certainly realize that wholesale changes are not a good idea and I suspect that FamilySearch is more than aware of the problem. You are welcome to contact me with any questions.
James Tanner
0 -
You can also watch the GEDCOM videos on RootsTech 2022.
0 -
You might not be aware ...
Who is you?
7.0.7...June/July 2021 (oops) ... The reference links are there ...
Rootstech 2022 GEDCOM videos ... I'll have to see if those add more about future specification roadmap...
Familysearch is certainly aware of problems - in fact - in the past I believe they had promised to throttle/limit accounts making such wholesale edits of Tree profiles?
Comments: A critical issue is whether a user's GEDCOM file is stripped of Sources when uploading to Genealogies. It seems that is what the above referenced wiki indicates. If that is true then comparing with Family Tree is already greatly discouraged - the user should already be well informed by that point. So if any new persons were 'compared/added' what is the point if the sources are stripped? ... Something to think about ... See above references and hints ...
I agree. I am for uploads/synching done well and not for ones that aren't - most of that responsibility falls on the uploader (open-edit). I am for restricting Tree edits of the most recent 4/5 generations (could be where most noticable/onerous 'problems' occur? - although anywhere could create a 'problem'). I am also for GEDCOM 'discussions' being grouped in a separate Community Category.
FamilySearch can continue successfully and continue making some changes - that is the hope.
0 -
For reference here are the Rootstech GEDCOM videos:
Merging with Family Tree (where @James Tanner) acknowledges this "major issue":
May I suggest that if the FamilySearch GEDCOM import process strips Sources already - that there really is nothing to compare to Family Tree profiles. So yes FamilySearch should not allow import of a non-sourced profile over a sourced one? Now, the merging process of comparing a profile with sources to the Family Tree profile may be useful... (this is what the major issue/debate etc. is discussing).
0 -
According to Jimmy Zimmerman's video:
The compare features in uploading through Genealogies [paraphrasing]"[...does so in a safe and non-duplicative manner ... One profile at a time. Other applications mentioned have a bit more bulk/batch processing capability...]." From this I expect - any bulk processing must have been done through some other application NOT Genealogies.
Again this should mean any reports of bulk modification of profiles is something to be investigated by Familysearch representatives - because they have promised in the past to limit such capability and have approved compatible tree management software/tools such that they can forensically identify offending accounts.
It would be interesting to know results of investigations of reports of bulk damage to Tree profiles - as to veracity or exaggeration. Familysearch Community should not promote/promulgate rumor.
0
