GENMSC-L Archives

Archiver > GENMSC > 2007-07 > 1184720701


From: Wes Groleau <groleau+>
Subject: Re: Beyond GEDCOM
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 01:05:01 GMT
References: <slrnf9ol6e.cvf.usenet@goodwill.larseighner.com><1184689853.767732.28500@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com><2h6ni.9164$zA4.5373@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
In-Reply-To: <2h6ni.9164$zA4.5373@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>


Robert Melson wrote:
> Out of curiosity, what would you suggest replace the gedcom

I thought he was asking for us to suggest what should.

> "standard"? Is the problem so much with the standard or with
> the programs that implement it?

Both. But GEDCOM itself is not nearly as limited as
most of the implementations of it. (Ironically, the
worst I've come across comes from the same source as
GEDCOM--PAF)

I take it back--the worst I've seen came from a program
that desperately took on the futile challenge not only
of comprehending PAF's approach to SOURces, but tried
to output SOURces PAF could understand WHILE adding to
them stuff to make it's job easier on re-import.

--
Wes Groleau

Is it an on-line compliment to call someone a Net Wit ?

This thread: