Jump to content


Photo

Templated Sources in GEDCOM and Data Exchange

templates sources places place details GEDCOM

  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 Brian Yokum

Brian Yokum

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts

Posted 02 July 2017 - 01:04 PM

One of the things that drove me to "extreme splitting" was the mangling of templated sources when exported through GEDCOM and possibly other data exchanges.  It seems like an option to export the completed footnote sentence as the source, rather than separating the "source" and "source details" in the GEDCOM, would be helpful.

 

A similar option could be provided to prepend "place details" to "place".  As others have pointed out, it would be nice to have things like cemetery names and church names survive the transfer somehow.

 

I know a lot of this is governed by GEDCOM and other standards.  I hate not being comfortable using certain features of RootsMagic out of fear that one day I may not be able to extract that data.

 



#2 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6254 posts

Posted 02 July 2017 - 01:10 PM

A similar option could be provided to prepend "place details" to "place".  As others have pointed out, it would be nice to have things like cemetery names and church names survive the transfer somehow.

TreeShare in RM7.5 has the option to do this in the Upload to Ancestry. It's an option that has been long requested for GEDCOM export.


Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#3 Brian Yokum

Brian Yokum

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts

Posted 02 July 2017 - 01:36 PM

Does syncing with FamilySearch Family Tree support this also?



#4 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3589 posts

Posted 02 July 2017 - 02:03 PM

Does syncing with FamilySearch Family Tree support this also?

 

The last time I played with it, it did not.

 

A subtle problem here is that FS/FT doesn't really want to receive the Place Details as a part of the Place field because doing so violates the Place Name Standard. FS/FT wants you to follow the Place Name Standard. I have ranted many times about the many things that are wrong with the Place Name Standard, and high on the list of things that are wrong with it is that it doesn't store cemetery information at all.

 

FS/FT doesn't actually prevent you from including cemetery names (and church names and hospital names etc.) with Place Names, but it's discouraged. So if you use the FS/FT web site directly, then you can ignore the Place Name Standard for data you submit to FS/FT. And if you put all place data into RM's Place Name field instead of including some of it in RM's Place Details field and if you then interface FS/FT from RM, then you can ignore the Place Name Standard for the data you submit to FS/FT.

 

Jerry



#5 Brian Yokum

Brian Yokum

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts

Posted 02 July 2017 - 02:47 PM

My understanding is that FamilySearch has both a "display place" and a "standard place".  It seems that the RootsMagic "place" could be used for the "standard place", and "place details" could be prepended to "place" for the "display place".  Perhaps there's a limitation in the FS/FT API that prevents this.

 

What is the situation with templated sources being passed to FS/FT?  Is this still a problem?  It seems like my proposal to use the completed footnote sentence would be helpful here.



#6 KFN

KFN

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 212 posts

Posted 03 July 2017 - 11:41 AM

In GEDCOM there is no "Place Detail" tag. For GEDCOM compatability I always put the entire place value in the place field including cemetery name or street address. As far as source data, GEDCOM does not have separate fields for all of the various datapoints that genealogy programs have/use/instaciate. Most of the specific values are entered into the "page" tag in the GEDCOM source_citation structure as outline in the following paragraph from the standard.


"Specific location with in the information referenced. For a published work, this could include the volume of a multi-volume work and the page number(s). For a periodical, it could include volume, issue, and page numbers. For a newspaper, it could include a column number and page number. For an unpublished source or microfilmed works, this could be a film or sheet number, page number, frame number, etc. A census record might have an enumerating district, page number, line number, dwelling number, and family number. The data in this field should be in the form of a label and value pair, such as Label1: value, Label2: value, with each pair being separated by a comma. For example, Film: 1234567, Frame: 344, Line: 28"

I expand this statement to include the website URL were the information came from.

#7 Brian Yokum

Brian Yokum

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts

Posted 03 July 2017 - 12:12 PM

KFN,

 

I appreciate your informed postings on the GEDCOM standard.

 

It sounds like in GEDCOM there is no way to transfer a formatted footnote, such as in Evidence Explained format, unless the entire footnote is transferred as the title.  That's why I believe a number of us have resorted to "extreme splitting" in RootsMagic.  I think an option in the RootsMagic GEDCOM export to export the footnote generated by a templated source would be helpful. 

 

Brian



#8 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6254 posts

Posted 03 July 2017 - 12:13 PM

There is no support for Source templates in FSFT. Free Form only. Extreme split, too, IIRC.

Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.


#9 KFN

KFN

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 212 posts

Posted 03 July 2017 - 12:33 PM

In GEDCOM there is not concept of "formatted footnote", and there does not need to be one.

Please remember, Evidence Explained is only one of many footnoting standards, it happens to be well thought out and very good at relating to genealogy, but it is not the only way to footnote, and footnotes are not the only way citation information can be used in various data reporting schemes.

Rather than depending on one footnote standard, data that relates to footnotes (end notes, inline citations, or indexes) should get kept as independent as possible, until that data is needed when the footnote, endnote, inline citation, or index is generated for the report, book, website, or index.

Therefore, GEDCOM as a data transfer standard should do its best to remain display independent. It does fail a little at this, not heavily, but fail it does at being completely benign.

#10 Jerry Bryan

Jerry Bryan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3589 posts

Posted 03 July 2017 - 12:51 PM

RM outputs the data elements that are stored in the Master Source in the TITL tag of GEDCOM and the data elements that are stored in the Source Details in the PAGE tag of GEDCOM. But I'm not sure exactly how RM makes the determination of how to construct the TITL text and the PAGE text. I think it consults the source sentence templates,  but source sentence templates do not necessarily place Master Source data elements to the left of Source Details data elements in the footnote sentence. Therefore, source data can become a bit mangled in the TITL and PAGE fields as compared to how it appears in RM's actual footnote sentence.

 

RM's source templates have sentence templates for footnote sentences, short footnote sentences, and bibliography sentences. I have wondered if they also need a TITL template and a PAGE template for GEDCOM export.

 

I haven't looked in detail about the additional GEDCOM that is exported when the Extra Details (RM specific) option is chosen for GEDCOM export, but it clearly provides a receiving software with much additional information about the source. But most software processes only the TITL and PAGE tags.

 

With an extremely split source, all the data will go into the TITL field. This is true with extremely split source templates, but is equally true if you extremely split the citation while using the free from source template. You can't tell the difference between the templates looking only at the TITL and PAGE tags.

 

I don't know for sure but have always assumed that an analogous procedure takes place when RM sends sourcing information through an API such as FS/FT or ancestry.com.

 

Jerry



#11 TomH

TomH

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6254 posts

Posted 04 July 2017 - 11:06 AM

The TITL field gets the Footnote sentence, sans the values of the Citation fields, and, IIRC, sans anything contained within a switch that is conditional on a Citation field.

Tom user of RM7550 FTM2017 Ancestry.ca FamilySearch.org FindMyPast.com
SQLite_Tools_For_Roots_Magic_in_PR_Celti wiki, exploiting the database in special ways >>> RMtrix-tiny.png app, a bundle of RootsMagic utilities.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: templates, sources, places, place details, GEDCOM