PAF-5-USERS-L Archives

Archiver > PAF-5-USERS > 2008-04 > 1207172209


From: Gaylon Findlay <>
Subject: Re: [PAF-5] No updates to PAF 5.0
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 15:36:49 -0600
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080402142121.052a9a00@cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080402142121.052a9a00@cox.net>


Elborn:

Your main question is: "I don't understand the reference to not working
directly with NFS?"

Let me try to explain. (I'm not sure which reference you are referring
to, but this is a general explanation.)

In order for a program to "work directly" with NFS, coding changes need
to be implemented. The LDS Church has started work on what they call an
API, which allows a program to "work directly with NFS". What this means
is that a program, by using the API provided by the Church, will be able
to show you data from NFS, will let you update your local data with data
from NFS, and will let you edit data on NFS -- including sending your
local copy of data to NFS. In the past, you have seen programs that let
you do one side of this. Programs such as Ancestral Quest will let you
see IGI data side by side with your PAF data, and copy data from IGI
into your PAF file. PAF 5 itself has not been able to do this -- it has
required the use of a commercial program to handle this task. The new
API will allow you to bring data from the new FamilySearch as well as to
send data the opposite direction -- from your database into the
FamilySearch system.

In its current state, PAF 5 does not have this API built into it, so it
is unable to directly work with the NFS. You will need a commercial
program like Ancestral Quest, which is currently being upgraded to use
this API, to do it for you.

Gaylon

ps. You can always upload your data from PAF to NFS via a GEDCOM file,
and you can copy and paste information from the NFS screens into PAF,
but I don't think that is what most people mean when they use the words,
"work directly with NFS".

Elborn Mendenhall wrote:
> A few days ago I posted the following comment on the mailing
> list, and while I have not received a direct reply, do I
> assume that my statement about search engines is
> correct, or do other reasons exist for not using PAF?
>
> As a user of PAF, (I also have other genealogical programs I use) but
> I like PAF but I don't understand the reference to not working directly
> with NFS? I assume this is a feature that other programs have which
> allow you to check on an individual and do an search on the Internet.
> I know that some of the other programs do that, and sometime I find
> it useful, sometimes I don't. I do wish that the search engines on
> sites such Footnote, Ascestry, WorldVitalRecords were better.
> When you know some things are true and you want other things,
> it is less than desirable to have 1930 Census records come up
> for a person you know was born in 174? and died by 184?.
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
>
>


This thread: