Re: Ada and GEDCOM [off-topic]

[Kilgallen@SpamCop.net (Larry Kilgallen)]

In article <VN6cnRkpc9yv67uiXTWJjQ@gbronline.com>, Wesley Groleau <wesgroleau@myrealbox.com> writes:
> 
>>>I'm just not happy with the assumptions that all genealogy
>>>programs force on us.  Even the most flexible and "open-minded"
>>>(LifeLines) wasn't flexible enough for me, and so I now just
>>>edit my GEDCOM with a plain text editor (pass it through LifeLines
>>>or something solely for error checking).
>> 
>> You sound quite experienced.  What are the limitations of Reunion ?
> 
> OK, you got me.  I've tried most of the _free_ ones and
> several of the not-free ones on Mac and Windows.  And I've
> looked at reviews and manuals for others.
> 
> I have tried neither TMG nor Reunion.  From what I can rememberm
> the best (if I had the money) might have been GenP from Australia
> and then TMG.  Can't remember much about Reunion now.

I noticed Reunion in the local Apple Store yesterday.

> Actually, even GEDCOM imposes more assumptions than I'd prefer.
> 
> The model of genealogy IMHO should be in events, relationships,
> and evidence.  GEDCOM (and because of GEDCOM, genealogy programs)
> makes the model individuals and families--and it defines a family
> as exactly two persons of different genders with biological
> children.  Adoption, foster care, relationships other than parent
> have to be represented by clumsy kludges patched into the standard
> after its basic structure was securely founded on FAM and INDI

When my father's uncle died, the uncle's brother married the widow and
helped raise some large number of children.  Apparently it was quite
common back then.  Software likely was not specified to handle such
relations, but my wife drew the diagrams using a free-form tool.
That is harder to do when borrowing rocket engine software that
has different specifications.

> But for sharing/publishing data, for the time being, we're stuck
> with GEDCOM.