TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2002-02 > 1013574936


From: Richard Brogger <>
Subject: Re: Death to gedcom was Re: [TMG] Witness and Roles and V5
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 22:35:36 -0600
References: <b9.1b7f8497.2999bfbc@cs.com><002001c1b373$b472d500$c77e323f@custom><00bc01c1b3fb$805fa6c0$9400a8c0@mshome.net><002401c1b428$c9f0af50$9c6c323f@custom>


Cheri Casper wrote:
>
> Gail - I have spent a lot of time and money on this supposed hobby,

<snip>
>
> Doesn't enough divisiveness already exist in the world for you? It
> certainly does for me. There is an expression that says "be the change you
> want to see in the world." I am trying to do my small part.
>
> CheriC

Hi Cheri,

I reread Gails message. I saw nothing that indicated she was not
willing to share. What she is not willing to do is send a GEDCOM. I am
the same way. Any relative can have whatever they want but I want them
to have MY data. I do not want them to have something that may have
been garbled by GEDCOM.

A cousin once sent me a GEDCOM from FTM 6.0. I opened that GEDCOM
using FTM 6.0. There were import errors. I asked her to send a FBC
instead. If the same program, same version, can have GEDCOM errors,
imagine what happens when it is two different programs.

I GenBridged FTM data to TMG. After I had cleaned up the import, I
exported via GEDCOM and imported to FTM. My data in FTM had never
looked as good, nothing was lost or messed up. So GEDCOM can work very
well but the sender must be the receiver to know that. If you use
GEDCOM to transfer data to PDF or whatever, you have total knowledge
of what is sent and what is received. If that same GEDCOM is sent to
someone else, you have no way to know what they received. Sharing is
great but only if the information received is the same as the
information sent.

I am not much for sending via snail mail and prefer e-mail. If the
format is important, I use attachments. If the formatting might be
lost going to WP or whatever, I check with the receiving person to
ensure that they have Word. If they don't, I print to Acrobat and send
that. Either way they get the information but I do what I can to
ensure that they see it just they way I intended it to be seen.

It is no different with data from TMG. I want them to see the data the
way I want it seen. If the only way to ensure it is right is to print
the data to Acrobat, that is what I would do. If they have one of the
genealogy programs I have and the situation warrants the effort, I
would export via GEDCOM, import to that other software, fix any
problems, and send the data as a FBC or whatever. Like Gail, I will
not send a GEDCOM, not because I will not share but because I want to
share my data, not what GEDCOM might do with with my data.

Last week I sent FTST to a Brögger in Germany, today to a cousin in
Norway, both at my expense. I did so because I want to share my data
with them but not via GEDCOM. My data sets are nothing great and I
spend most of my time fixing. I'll be darned if I want some other
software messing up what I have been trying to get right. Once they
have seen it as I intended it to be seen, I really don't care what
they do with it, just as long as they do not link me to their results.

If they post messed up data to a web site, there is little I can do
about it. I just don't want the blame. Someday I will post information
to a web site. It will not contain source data, it will not be much
more than a list of names with birth dates. If someone wants
relationships, sources, etc., they will have to contact me. They may
receive a sqz, pdf, or doc but not a GEDCOM.

Richard Brogger

This thread: