In article <1184885911.795854.21970@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com>, "the_verminator@comcast.net" <the_verminator@comcast.net> writes: > On Jul 19, 10:51 am, moja...@mojaveg.lsan.mdsg-pacwest.com (Everett M. > Greene) wrote: >> Wes Groleau <groleau+n...@freeshell.org> writes: >> > Everett M. Greene wrote: >> > > Not having looked at the XML-based proposals, I'm not familiar >> > > with what's being proposed, but if the preceding is a valid >> > > example, I don't see any significant benefit. As you say, >> > > there's not semantic difference and clutter is being added for >> > > no obvious reason. >> >> > That's why I said, it's like going from English to pig-Latin. >> > Semantically there is no difference. Any flaws in the GEDCOM >> > data model are in both versions. And there are flaws, though >> > GEDCOM obviously is not completely useless. (And that's why >> > no one seems to be in a big hurry to fix it.) >> >> > I can think of two advantges of XML: >> >> > 1. Open source and commercial XML parsers are everywhere. >> >> > 2. If you know how to use XSL, you can write a presentation >> > stylesheet. Your GEDCOM (XML) file plus the XSL is all >> > that's necessary for a sufficiently modern browser to >> > make a fairly nice web page. In other words, instead >> > of writing code to transform GEDCOM into HTML, you write >> > a high-level spec for that code, and the user's browser >> > does all the rest of the work! >> >> Those are valid points for those who are interested in generating >> Web-oriented presentations. But what portion of people dealing >> with genealogy are interested in doing that?- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Well.... if you enter the phrase "this website" and the word genealogy > into google it comes up with one million two hundred ninety thousand > hits. > > So someone is interested for sure! > > I think it goes beyond mere interest. With Micro$oft dabbling in their "cloud o/s" and much of the 'net already using the web to some degree for transactions of all sorts, it's probably only a matter of time before web-oriented presentations of genealogical data becomes the norm, rather than the exception. I think applications like phpGedView, The Next Generation and, to a lesser extent, GeneWeb represent the tip of that particular iceberg. Bob Melson -- Robert G. Melson | Rio Grande MicroSolutions | El Paso, Texas ----- "People unfit for freedom---who cannot do much with it---are hungry for power." ---Eric Hoffer

On Jul 19, 6:29 pm, mels...@aragorn.rgmhome.net (Robert Melson) wrote: > I think it goes beyond mere interest. With Micro$oft dabbling > in their "cloud o/s" and much of the 'net already using the > web to some degree for transactions of all sorts, it's probably > only a matter of time before web-oriented presentations of > genealogical data becomes the norm, rather than the exception. I > think applications like phpGedView, The Next Generation and, to > a lesser extent, GeneWeb represent the tip of that particular > iceberg. > > Bob Melson I agree. John Cardinal's Second Site 2 (just released) is one of the better tools for web presentations I've seen. Easily customized, quick, and powerful. Unfortunately it is, for the present, restricted to using TMG (The Master Genealogist) files. For less than $30 it can't be beat!