"Enno Borgsteede" <ennoborg@gmail.com> wrote in message news:3c906$512f7062$5ed1100c$6320@cache60.multikabel.net... > Hi Tony, > >> I'm afraid the sleight in my previous post was aimed at those > annoying folks >> who say: it's not possible (it is), it'll never work (it will) > > I'm happy to be one of those. I've seen many efforts to unite people on a > single idea, and as far as I know, most have failed. And the reason why > they failed is simple: > > When you design a model, it is based on your view of the world, i.e., > something in your head. That's not some scientific truth, if that could > exist, it's YOUR view. > > Now, when I look at your model, like I did last week in our RootsDev > hangout, I see things that I like, things that look way too complicated > for my purposes, and I miss a few things that are essential to ME. > > And when I tell you about these things, there's a fat chance that you > think the same way about my ideas, and that's why it can't work. It's like > wanting all people in the world to think the same, act the same, and I > find that a frightening idea. > > Thinking about one model is like expecting that all operating systems use > the same file system (they don't), all people follow the same religion > (they don't), or economists to think alike (they don't). > > I believe in standards for interfaces, like HDMI, and USB, but I don't > believe in a single model that rules all computers in the world. There is > too much variety in people's ideas, and that's how I like it to be. > > As far as I'm concerned, people (and genealogy) benefit the most when you > don't try to force a standard model upon them, which is why I will not > join the FHISO. For me, it's just as bad an idea as the Euro. > > thanks, > > Enno > Thanks for posting this Enno because you're very wrong here. FHISO standards are developed collaboratively. There is no such thing as "my model". Neither I, nor any other individual, is developing a standard that all others are expected to use. All members are invited to list requirements, recommendations, and even proposals for design elements. If you're not there then how can FHISO accommodate your own personal requirements? Tony Proctor

Tony Proctor wrote: > "Enno Borgsteede" <ennoborg@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:3c906$512f7062$5ed1100c$6320@cache60.multikabel.net... >> Hi Tony, >> >>> I'm afraid the sleight in my previous post was aimed at those >> annoying folks >>> who say: it's not possible (it is), it'll never work (it will) >> >> I'm happy to be one of those. I've seen many efforts to unite people on a >> single idea, and as far as I know, most have failed. And the reason why >> they failed is simple: >> >> When you design a model, it is based on your view of the world, i.e., >> something in your head. That's not some scientific truth, if that could >> exist, it's YOUR view. >> >> Now, when I look at your model, like I did last week in our RootsDev >> hangout, I see things that I like, things that look way too complicated >> for my purposes, and I miss a few things that are essential to ME. >> >> And when I tell you about these things, there's a fat chance that you >> think the same way about my ideas, and that's why it can't work. It's like >> wanting all people in the world to think the same, act the same, and I >> find that a frightening idea. >> >> Thinking about one model is like expecting that all operating systems use >> the same file system (they don't), all people follow the same religion >> (they don't), or economists to think alike (they don't). >> >> I believe in standards for interfaces, like HDMI, and USB, but I don't >> believe in a single model that rules all computers in the world. There is >> too much variety in people's ideas, and that's how I like it to be. >> >> As far as I'm concerned, people (and genealogy) benefit the most when you >> don't try to force a standard model upon them, which is why I will not >> join the FHISO. For me, it's just as bad an idea as the Euro. >> >> thanks, >> >> Enno >> > > Thanks for posting this Enno because you're very wrong here. FHISO standards > are developed collaboratively. There is no such thing as "my model". Neither > I, nor any other individual, is developing a standard that all others are > expected to use. > > All members are invited to list requirements, recommendations, and even > proposals for design elements. If you're not there then how can FHISO > accommodate your own personal requirements? > > Tony Proctor > > What's the saying? A camel is a horse designed by a committee. Bob Melson -- Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande Microsolutions | El Paso, Texas ----- Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the Government take care of him, better take a closer look at the American Indian. -- Henry Ford

Hi Tony, > Thanks for posting this Enno because you're very wrong here. FHISO standards > are developed collaboratively. There is no such thing as "my model". Neither > I, nor any other individual, is developing a standard that all others are > expected to use. > > All members are invited to list requirements, recommendations, and even > proposals for design elements. If you're not there then how can FHISO > accommodate your own personal requirements? I'm not there, because I know that the governing body of the FHISO consists of people who spent most of their time rejecting other peoples ideas on better gedcom, like the idea of personas. When you want standards, you need people who are open minded, i.e. that they accept that someone wants to use a technique that they personally reject as a waste of time. FHISO is not like that. Look: I personally think that putting templates from evidence explained into genealogy is a waste of time. Programs that implement it scare me away, but I know that if enough people support it, it will be part of the standard, so I will have to accept that it's there. In better gedcom, I saw that people rejected a simple model like DeadEnds, saying that they saw no need to collect data, and that nominal record linking was a silly idea. And at the same time, they spent a lot of time advocating things that I think are silly too. My point is, if you believe in cooperation, you can't reject things that way. You will have to accept that there are parts in the model or standard that you will probably never use yourself. If you can't, as some members of the FHISO have proven on the better gedcom wiki, and on stack exchange, you don't belong in a standards organisation. And as long as these people are there, I won't join. cheers, Enno