On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 22:08:25 -0500, singhals <singhals@erols.com> wrote in soc.genealogy.computing: >Kenny McCormack wrote: > >> I also agree with (whoever it was) the poster who wrote that feature-creep >> will eventually doom this project (writing a GEDCOM lib in AWK). > >That's one of the things wrong with GED -- people wanted it >to do things it was /never/ intended to do, but developers >of GEDStand "tweaked" the standard to allow each s/w >developer to (a) meet the minimum standard while (b) getting >95% on moves between two users of the same program. People >started complaining before the GEDStan developers got out of >their hotel, because, hey, only 95%? > >Cheryl >ahhh, yes, I am still trying to forget GedStan discussions! You know what is wrong with Gedcom ? The format itself is something very powerful and I am surprised it is not in use in other fields. But the format is adapted to a hierarchical structure that is not compatible with a straight column-based database. So, what is wrong is not the format but its use. Denis -- Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG) Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - www.francogene.com/genealogie--quebec/ French in North America before 1722 - www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/ Sur cédérom à 1780 - On CD-ROM to 1780

Denis Beauregard wrote: > On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 22:08:25 -0500, singhals<singhals@erols.com> > wrote in soc.genealogy.computing: > >> Kenny McCormack wrote: >> >>> I also agree with (whoever it was) the poster who wrote that feature-creep >>> will eventually doom this project (writing a GEDCOM lib in AWK). >> >> That's one of the things wrong with GED -- people wanted it >> to do things it was /never/ intended to do, but developers >> of GEDStand "tweaked" the standard to allow each s/w >> developer to (a) meet the minimum standard while (b) getting >> 95% on moves between two users of the same program. People >> started complaining before the GEDStan developers got out of >> their hotel, because, hey, only 95%? >> >> Cheryl >> ahhh, yes, I am still trying to forget GedStan discussions! > > You know what is wrong with Gedcom ? The format itself is something > very powerful and I am surprised it is not in use in other fields. > But the format is adapted to a hierarchical structure that is not > compatible with a straight column-based database. So, what is wrong > is not the format but its use. (G) The loose nut on the keyboard? The custom reports, saved as a csv and imported into a spreadsheet, do a fair amount of the most common sorting I want to do. When it doesn't, I go RTFM to see what I can find. ONE of the filters I'd like to have is something along the lines of "show me everyone whose surname matches C-610 and whose wife's given name contains Edna" Or, sometimes more urgent, "show me all the Edna whose husband's given name contains George." Yeah, I've got a spreadsheet, but it ought to be do-able from within the program. Cheryl