Bob Velke wrote: > Peter said: > >> Going by web searching, there seems to have been no movement on the >> Gentech data model since 2001. There also seems to be an annual flurry >> of mentions in relation to the NGS conference, but no further >> developments. > > > No further developments by whom? We're all volunteers. Some of us > spent five years developing the GDM which was sponsored by all of the > major genealogy societies in the U.S. and it was promptly ignored by the > developers of the most popular software. The ground swell of market > forces by researchers who claimed to be passionate about the subject > also never materialized. Who do you think has the incentive to do more? > > In fact, there are a number of developers who are using the GDM (or some > derivative of it) to develop software programs, XML transfer specs, and > other projects. You can find some of them on the GenealogyXML mailing > list but I wouldn't ever expect to hear about them in the mainstream. > > Yes, about once a year there is a flurry of people who are aghast that > "nobody is doing anything" to solve their problems. > > Bob Velke > Wholly Genes, Inc. > The Gentech data model seems to me to provide a high-level set of principles rather than a directly implementable specification. That may be why there is not much mention of it, but it does make its influence more difficult to gauge. I have in the past described my own Gendatam model as compatible with (or some such language) the Gentech model, but as it was not actually derived from the Gentech model, I gave up on that. The strong point in the Gentech model is the emphasis on evidence, All genealogy software developers ought to take that on board. Peter