Re: GEDOM as a database format

Doug McDonald <mcdonald@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:fjrft2$vj3$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

XML is like ISO 9000/9001: it it form without meaning or purpose.
It is basically meaningless. It is in the same category as
"proofs" that a computer program is "correct" ... based on
some "requirement" that itself could be buggy as can be.


Wow. I'm not sure where to start. One of the primary benefits that I see
with XML is that (one of) it's purposes is structure, yet flexibility to
adapt and extend. The second would be that definitions are known (by
virtue of the <shudder> structure of the schema document) by anyone who
wants to use the data. -see more about that below..

What matters is not the form but the meaning. And I seriously doubt
that the genealogy community will agree to one straitjacket
format for meaning, that is, structure. Will FTM and TMG agree

Certainly everyone can agree on items such as Name, Date, Source, Notes,
Comments, etc.
Yes??

to change their basic workings so they are the same? That will
be necessary of they are to share data in an exact perfect
match manner.

If at least a basic XML schema is agreed on and XML used in any fashion,
at the very least it would be an exchange standard. At the best it would
comply with the XML intent that it accept a new schema document without
harming or loosing the original data structure, and allow for the same
data set to be used by a differing piece of software that might make use
of "expanded" sets of tags.


In genealogy there really is only one single absolute given,
at least, if one attributes the meaning of "is" to mean
"born before DNA technology on people". That is,
a given person, going back in time, has a binary
tree of ancestors, exactly two per generation, with possible
coelescence. (Now, these days, of course, a person can have two
mothers: the autosomal/X mother and the mitochondrial mother .. and
this doesn't fit with that model!).

There are quite a few "absolutes", I think. What differs is exactly as
you say- How completely & correctly people enter the "absolute" values
(XML can help with this- if nothing more than to show you that there is
an empty "hole" in the needed data, and that it wasn't just forgotten or
missing in the export), and how people put two and two together (XML can
help here as well with a schema that only does what it is supposed to
to- classify the data, not analyze or manipulate it).


Beyond that some programs may tie things to "events"
or "extra types of so-called 'parents'", etc. and they
are just not going to agree on how.


Software and user preference should be the only forces that draw
conclusions, and those conclusions shouldn't change the data (the
facts), or the description of what the data is.

The whole idea of portability of dats is impossible.

What's really impossible is to think that there is one schema that can
do it all. The data is what it is, no more, no less. Just as I used a
subset of my automotive data (that was mainly meant for engineers) to
publish training materials (not build them from scratch), you just need
a schema that at it's most basic level allows for tagging ALL of the
data, and increasingly refines the data into more and more granular bits
that don't differ, rather expand on the more basic tag. And, if I add
data to your set to suit my purposes, you may choose to ignore it
because you put cars together, not tear them apart. My uses and yours
are complimentary, not exclusionary. You would just ignore my training
data.

At the end of the day, if you I may not agree with the criteria that you
accept for relationships, but I would accept that you got someone's name
and statement that they had an offspring if you tell me where you got it
from. Then, it's really up to me (and you) to decide if that connects
us, isn't it? None of that changes the data itself. Unless you made a
typo :-)

Doug McDonald

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: XSD vs XSI
    ... The XML file that I encounter has a line ... I don't quite understand what's the meaning of this line. ... You'd use this namespace to define the ... You'd use this namespace to do things like say which schema ...
    (comp.text.xml)
  • Re: how to return xml document from a web service
    ... what specific XML you expect. ... If you have a schema that defines what you expect, ... The second issue with this approach is that XML is not a string. ... >> methods from the wire transport. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet.webservices)
  • my first Tck/Tk program... and an XML question
    ... program which takes an XML Schema file, ... a basic XML tree and allows the user to save it. ... proc open_schema { ...
    (comp.lang.tcl)
  • RE: Data Insertion
    ... >The physical database structure is already in place. ... >I can determine the XML file and whether it contains a schema. ... In this particular case XML Schema is used to create a DataSet schema (set ... you're probably wondering how it's possible to load XML without XML ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.compactframework)
  • [ANN] New XML Editor in Visual Studio 2005 Beta 1
    ... Full syntax coloring for all XML and DTD syntax. ... Intellisense based on any DTD, ... Schema picker dialog for overriding schemas used for validation, which is then remembered as a document property in your solution. ... Goto Definition command for navigating between elements and their associated DTD, XDR or XSD schema definitions. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.xml)