GENMSC-L Archives

Archiver > GENMSC > 2007-07 > 1184785656


From: David Harper <>
Subject: Re: Beyond GEDCOM
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:07:36 GMT
References: <slrnf9ol6e.cvf.usenet@goodwill.larseighner.com>
In-Reply-To: <slrnf9ol6e.cvf.usenet@goodwill.larseighner.com>


Lars Eighner wrote:
> Here is the problem: GEDCOM has become the de facto standard for family
> history and geneology data. And the problem with that is that the Mormons
> own GEDCOM and thus it is rife with built-in religious limitations.

That's an unfair characterisation of both the Mormons and of the GEDCOM
format, in my view.

Whatever you may think of the LDS Church, the genealogy community has
much to thank them for. Without them, a huge amount of genealogical
data would be locked away in government archives instead of available
for us to use.

And this was true even before the rise of the Internet. The LDS Church
paid to have priceless resources such as British census returns copied
onto microfilm, and their family history centres were open to everyone.

For the record, incidentally, I'm not a member of the LDS Church, or
indeed any church. I'm just an amateur genealogist whose research in
the 1980s wouldn't have got very far, were it not for the resources
provided by the Mormons.

As to the GEDCOM format, it originated with the LDS Church, and they
maintain the standard, but at least it is an open standard that any
developer of genealogy software can use without having to pay a licence
fee or sign a non-disclosure agreement.

That very openness is why every major piece of genealogy software can
import and export GEDCOM files.

> As you might expect, GEDCOM does not allow you to enter a family created by
> same-sex marriage or civil unions even where they are lawful. But there are
> other limitations. For example, in GEDCOM 5.xx, an adopted child does not
> belong to his family. When he looks up his family in a GEDCOM-compliant
> file, he is not there. How needlessly hurtful is that?

There are three separate issues here.

First, adoption. The GEDCOM 5.5 standard includes two different ways to
specify an adoptive relationship, as well as providing a way to indicate
both the adoptive family and the biological family of an individual. It
even includes a way to describe a foster-family relationship.

So, it is plain wrong to imply that an adopted child cannot be linked to
both his adoptive family and his birth family in a GEDCOM file,
provided, of course, that his birth family is known.

Second, civil unions. There is no reason why a civil union between a
man and a woman cannot be represented in a GEDCOM file. If you do not
wish to record it as a marriage, that's fine. GEDCOM provides a generic
event tag which can be used to describe all manner of events outside
those specifically catered for. You can add a civil union ceremony via
that route, if your genealogy application is smart enough.

Finally, same-sex marriages. Okay, you have a point here. GEDCOM
defines a family unit to be a husband and a wife, plus children.

That's pretty much the only type of family unit you'll encounter in
historical records, which makes up most of the data in the vast majority
of GEDCOM files.

Same-sex marriage is still a very new phenomenon, and the GEDCOM
standard hasn't caught up with the changing zeitgeist. Then again,
neither have the governments of most of the countries of the world, and
to be frank, I consider that to be a greater injustice than the fact
that the GEDCOM standard doesn't allow it.

David Harper
Cambridge, England

This thread: