ROOTSMAGIC-USERS-L Archives

Archiver > ROOTSMAGIC-USERS > 2005-02 > 1107610568


From: "Eric Norton" <>
Subject: RE: [RMagic] RM and FTM
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 08:44:55 -0500
In-Reply-To: <42044F76.7050607@gci.net>


RootsMagic (any Genealogy program) should be used with as little interaction
with GEDCOM files as possible. Exporting only when necessary and in the
anticipation the recipient is using the same software (like concurrent user
feature within RM). Always backup your database before importing. It is not
an RM issue nor a program issue in general. After having programmed against
many ISO and other standards, I have found the GEDCOM 5.5 standard to be
anything but standard and possibly second only to the library MARC standard
for utter chaos in design. Like the MARC it was meant to incorporate widely
different users' idiotsyncrasies (not a typo). The GEDCOM has built in
'either or' specifications, 'optional' requirements (note the oxymoron),
tiered relative tags that can be defined at different points within the file
(source notes issue with some programs' exports and RM 1 import). I am
surprised to find it didn't have specs that varied based on day of the week,
moon phase or stock market fluctuation.

Three additional assessments:
1. Stick with the program you are using until you find a wildly better
program.
2. Learn that program as if your life's history depended upon it.
3. For me, RootsMagic is that program. (GenSmarts is a great complement to
RM.)
(I used FTM 4,7,10 and the thought of 11 being a step backward made me start
hunting.)

-----Original Message-----
From: Wild Bill [mailto:]
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 11:46 PM
To:
Subject: Re: [RMagic] RM and FTM


They all claim to adhere to the gedcom standard but none do. I think
it's to keep one captive, so one can't easily switch prrograms.

MScheffler wrote:

> I think Ruth makes a good point in that it is good to stick with one
>genealogy program rather than attempting to move data back and forth
between
>two or more programs through gedcom files. Maybe if all programs adhered
to
>the gedcom standard this would be less of a problem.
>

This thread: