Hi Andreas, I think AJ covered most everything of what I might suggest. I agree with his point about getting rid of the captchas. Also, of course, some sort of e-mail contact info (and/or a simple messaging system) would be important. In terms of "nice to haves", one thought that comes to mind: it might be interesting to allow separate entries for all the known individuals along the paternal (or maternal) lineage. (These entries might each consist of fields for name, locations, birth and death years, and notes.) I'm thinking it would be nice to have something simpler than GEDCOM for these direct lineages, but also more comprehensive than a single most-distant ancestor (I've found that relying on the latter can particularly be a limitation for investigating mtDNA matches). In terms of importing/exporting results, I think it would be great if the system could handle uploads/downloads of a simple text/ASCII representation of the Y-STRs, along the lines of FTDNA's .csv export of Y-STR results. I imagine YSEQ would be able to produce similar files (if they don't do so already). That way, people could upload the results from FTDNA and YSEQ without needing to worry about manual entry of all the individual markers. I think YSEQ uses the same marker counting standards as FTDNA, so conversion of marker values shouldn't be an issue for comparing between those two sources. It would also be nice to have at least some rudimentary allowance for associating each Y-STR profile with a haplogroup or SNP(s)…there are of course challenges associated with this, including the fact that our understanding of the tree is constantly evolving. However, even something as simple as a generic text field for people to enter haplogroup details/comments might be useful. If you and/or others are able to implement something along these lines, I think it would be awesome. Greg On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 3:26 AM, Andreas West <ahnen@awest.de> wrote: > Greg, > > I agree with your point that an alternative, company independent and open > to all sorts of Y-DNA and mtDNA testing results would be good, if not > needed (see the other now closed/destroyed databases at Ancestry). > > What kind of features would you expect from such a service? > > Comparing STR results sounds like an easy to feature, I have never looked > at my results (not even sure if FTDNA allows for download of the raw Y-DNA > data) but the resulting number of STR's must be very small in comparison to > SNP's (given the larger effort to get them by hand). > > What else would you see as absolutely necessary, nice-to-have? That list > should include features that might not exist today? > > I'm thinking about offering this maybe in the future but I haven't spend > much time with it (Y-DNA) so I don't know how big of an effort it would be. > > Andreas > >

Thanks for your feedback Greg. I also think that the future lies in connecting our own results into one giant phylotree. That would be an ever evolving tree for sure (as you wrote) but even with the simplest test we could place people at least somewhere further in the tree and show them further options what to check for (like additional SNP's). Andreas > On 9 Dec 2015, at 12:27, G. Magoon <gregm4584@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Andreas, > I think AJ covered most everything of what I might suggest. I agree with his point about getting rid of the captchas. Also, of course, some sort of e-mail contact info (and/or a simple messaging system) would be important. > > In terms of "nice to haves", one thought that comes to mind: it might be interesting to allow separate entries for all the known individuals along the paternal (or maternal) lineage. (These entries might each consist of fields for name, locations, birth and death years, and notes.) I'm thinking it would be nice to have something simpler than GEDCOM for these direct lineages, but also more comprehensive than a single most-distant ancestor (I've found that relying on the latter can particularly be a limitation for investigating mtDNA matches). > > In terms of importing/exporting results, I think it would be great if the system could handle uploads/downloads of a simple text/ASCII representation of the Y-STRs, along the lines of FTDNA's .csv export of Y-STR results. I imagine YSEQ would be able to produce similar files (if they don't do so already). That way, people could upload the results from FTDNA and YSEQ without needing to worry about manual entry of all the individual markers. I think YSEQ uses the same marker counting standards as FTDNA, so conversion of marker values shouldn't be an issue for comparing between those two sources. > > It would also be nice to have at least some rudimentary allowance for associating each Y-STR profile with a haplogroup or SNP(s)…there are of course challenges associated with this, including the fact that our understanding of the tree is constantly evolving. However, even something as simple as a generic text field for people to enter haplogroup details/comments might be useful. > > If you and/or others are able to implement something along these lines, I think it would be awesome. > > Greg > >> On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 3:26 AM, Andreas West <ahnen@awest.de> wrote: >> Greg, >> >> I agree with your point that an alternative, company independent and open to all sorts of Y-DNA and mtDNA testing results would be good, if not needed (see the other now closed/destroyed databases at Ancestry). >> >> What kind of features would you expect from such a service? >> >> Comparing STR results sounds like an easy to feature, I have never looked at my results (not even sure if FTDNA allows for download of the raw Y-DNA data) but the resulting number of STR's must be very small in comparison to SNP's (given the larger effort to get them by hand). >> >> What else would you see as absolutely necessary, nice-to-have? That list should include features that might not exist today? >> >> I'm thinking about offering this maybe in the future but I haven't spend much time with it (Y-DNA) so I don't know how big of an effort it would be. >> >> Andreas >>

Greg, You raise a good point about a line of ancestors rather than just the presumed most distant. In my surname project, early published genealogical books claim that certain USA families descended from brothers in the 1600, whereas Y-DNA clearly shows the assumed brothers did not have the same Y-DNA, ie did not have the same direct male line ancestor in the past 30,000 years. So giving a line of ancestors is more helpful, as it still would work even if it wrongly assumes the most distant ancestor. In my projects some even believe family legends, and claim their earliest known male line ancestor was someone living 1000 years ago. In some cases they may be right, in others they may be wrong. One good thing about the Sorenson database was the well documented pedigrees. When I found matches in that database I was really able to infer a possible point or region of connection, the genealogies were hugely helpful. Pity Ancestry.com poisoned the database, then shot it dead just to make sure the gifts of contributors of DNA and pedigrees to the Sorenson project would not benefit posterity. But I think I commented on that recently! If a new private Y database was formed, it would increase its value many times over if it had extended pedigrees. Direct male lines at least, not sure about male cousin lines, but I think not maternal lines, other than spouses of the direct male lines. Maternal lines would be good, but would considerably increase computer power to store and search information. If the database had too much of a genealogical focus, Ancestry might try and buy it and close it down. I think the default should be no names of ancestors living or born before about 1900, but there are different views on that. Just thinking a few years ahead, the time might come when someone managing a new database or someone else might try linking ancestral lines of participants in the database based on their trees where corroborated by STRs or SNPs. If more details of male lines were included this might be more feasible. Perhaps the end game would be a single male line family tree of the human race. Just think, query the database and be told that Bill Smith and John Brown were estimated to be 37th cousins on the male line! Another thought is archaeological Y-DNA. This might start becoming quite common. It would be good if this information could be integrated....... but that might really involve work! The question has been raised as to whether a new database needs to plan ahead for a long life. I say that as small as the Sorenson database was compared to other databases today, it's loss is still being felt. Even if a new Y database, with heaps of Y line genealogy was closed to new entries in 5 years, it would be nice if the database could be left to some organisation, perhaps even Family Search, so that it would be an ongoing legacy for future generations. Andreas, if you started a new Y database, you might consider some sort of loose association with an organisation like ISOGG. There might also be means of finding a donor to help with cost if that was necessary. There must be at least one person on this list with connections to big potential donor companies. Andreas, if you started a new Y database which after your time was left to posterity via some caretaker organisation, you might be remembered in the future as a giant of the stature of Sorenson himself, who made substantial efforts to leave something of value to posterity. John. Sent from my iPad > On 9/12/2015, at 6:27 pm, G. Magoon via <genealogy-dna@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > Hi Andreas, > I think AJ covered most everything of what I might suggest. I agree with > his point about getting rid of the captchas. Also, of course, some sort of > e-mail contact info (and/or a simple messaging system) would be important. > > In terms of "nice to haves", one thought that comes to mind: it might be > interesting to allow separate entries for all the known individuals along > the paternal (or maternal) lineage. (These entries might each consist of > fields for name, locations, birth and death years, and notes.) I'm thinking > it would be nice to have something simpler than GEDCOM for these direct > lineages, but also more comprehensive than a single most-distant ancestor > (I've found that relying on the latter can particularly be a limitation for > investigating mtDNA matches). > > In terms of importing/exporting results, I think it would be great if the > system could handle uploads/downloads of a simple text/ASCII representation > of the Y-STRs, along the lines of FTDNA's .csv export of Y-STR results. I > imagine YSEQ would be able to produce similar files (if they don't do so > already). That way, people could upload the results from FTDNA and YSEQ > without needing to worry about manual entry of all the individual markers. > I think YSEQ uses the same marker counting standards as FTDNA, so > conversion of marker values shouldn't be an issue for comparing between > those two sources. > > It would also be nice to have at least some rudimentary allowance for > associating each Y-STR profile with a haplogroup or SNP(s)…there are of > course challenges associated with this, including the fact that our > understanding of the tree is constantly evolving. However, even something > as simple as a generic text field for people to enter haplogroup > details/comments might be useful. > > If you and/or others are able to implement something along these lines, I > think it would be awesome. > > Greg > >> On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 3:26 AM, Andreas West <ahnen@awest.de> wrote: >> >> Greg, >> >> I agree with your point that an alternative, company independent and open >> to all sorts of Y-DNA and mtDNA testing results would be good, if not >> needed (see the other now closed/destroyed databases at Ancestry). >> >> What kind of features would you expect from such a service? >> >> Comparing STR results sounds like an easy to feature, I have never looked >> at my results (not even sure if FTDNA allows for download of the raw Y-DNA >> data) but the resulting number of STR's must be very small in comparison to >> SNP's (given the larger effort to get them by hand). >> >> What else would you see as absolutely necessary, nice-to-have? That list >> should include features that might not exist today? >> >> I'm thinking about offering this maybe in the future but I haven't spend >> much time with it (Y-DNA) so I don't know how big of an effort it would be. >> >> Andreas > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENEALOGY-DNA-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message