Quantcast

GEDCOM Tags recognised but not supported

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

GEDCOM Tags recognised but not supported

Harvey Nimmo
I have just received a fascinating GEDCOM file that I could import into
gramps. However, there are some tags 'recognised but not supported',
for example: 3 _LOC @P29@

Lines like these apparently point to lines at the end of the file that
contain, e.g.:
0 @P29@ _LOC
1 NAME Nordhausen

And those records at the end of the file are not imported with the
remark: "Records not imported into Top Level:

Line ignored as not understood                                     Line
  2842: 0 P29 _LOC
Skipped subordinate line                                           Line
  2843: 1 NAME Laon Neustrien"

Is it possible to modify these lines to make them importable, does
anyone know?

Cheers
Harvey



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: GEDCOM Tags recognised but not supported

manzi.sam
Hi Harvey,

Sounds like you have a GEDCOM with the German extension to GEDCOM 5.5 called Gedcom 5.5EL, which adds support for storing additional information for locations. 

Would you be able to create an example file and add it to the related feature request (Or email me directly)?

Related feature request is here:
https://gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=688

Thank you
Sam

On 21 September 2016 at 01:07, Harvey Nimmo <[hidden email]> wrote:
I have just received a fascinating GEDCOM file that I could import into
gramps. However, there are some tags 'recognised but not supported',
for example: 3 _LOC @P29@

Lines like these apparently point to lines at the end of the file that
contain, e.g.:
0 @P29@ _LOC
1 NAME Nordhausen

And those records at the end of the file are not imported with the
remark: "Records not imported into Top Level:

Line ignored as not understood                                     Line
  2842: 0 P29 _LOC
Skipped subordinate line                                           Line
  2843: 1 NAME Laon Neustrien"

Is it possible to modify these lines to make them importable, does
anyone know?

Cheers
Harvey



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: GEDCOM Tags recognised but not supported

Harvey Nimmo
Hi Sam,

yes, you are right it would be the German extension. I am not sure I could construct a valid file, so I will send it for you to do.

Cheers
Harvey

On Wed, 2016-09-21 at 08:03 +1000, Sam Manzi wrote:
Hi Harvey,

Sounds like you have a GEDCOM with the German extension to GEDCOM 5.5 called Gedcom 5.5EL, which adds support for storing additional information for locations. 

Would you be able to create an example file and add it to the related feature request (Or email me directly)?

Related feature request is here:
https://gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=688

Thank you
Sam

On 21 September 2016 at 01:07, Harvey Nimmo <[hidden email]> wrote:
I have just received a fascinating GEDCOM file that I could import into
gramps. However, there are some tags 'recognised but not supported',
for example: 3 _LOC @P29@

Lines like these apparently point to lines at the end of the file that
contain, e.g.:
0 @P29@ _LOC
1 NAME Nordhausen

And those records at the end of the file are not imported with the
remark: "Records not imported into Top Level:

Line ignored as not understood                                     Line
  2842: 0 P29 _LOC
Skipped subordinate line                                           Line
  2843: 1 NAME Laon Neustrien"

Is it possible to modify these lines to make them importable, does
anyone know?

Cheers
Harvey



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: GEDCOM Tags recognised but not supported

m.miesbauer
Hi Harvey,

did you get a solution, how to replace the _LOC tags with standard Gedcom 5.5 tags?

Thanks
Markus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: GEDCOM Tags recognised but not supported

Harvey Nimmo
No, as far as I can tell! I tried looking for the (10-year-old!)
Bug/Feature request in Mantis with no success! So I wonder if it has
been 'retired'. But again, maybe I'm too dim to know how to find it. I
thought I had added a note to it, but it doesn't turn up in the filter.

Is there an easy way to edit a GEDCOM file to replace _LOC tags with
standard Gedcom 5.5 tags? I don't really want to learn GEDCOM
'language'.

Cheers
Harvey

 


On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 01:26 -0800, m.miesbauer wrote:

> Hi Harvey, 
>
> did you get a solution, how to replace the _LOC tags with standard
> Gedcom
> 5.5 tags? 
>
> Thanks 
> Markus
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://gramps.1791082.n4.nabble.com/GED
> COM-Tags-recognised-but-not-supported-tp4676901p4679306.html
> Sent from the GRAMPS - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> Announcing the Oxford Dictionaries API! The API offers world-renowned
> dictionary content that is easy and intuitive to access. Sign up for
> an
> account today to start using our lexical data to power your apps and
> projects. Get started today and enter our developer competition.
> http://sdm.link/oxford
> _______________________________________________
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
> https://gramps-project.org

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Announcing the Oxford Dictionaries API! The API offers world-renowned
dictionary content that is easy and intuitive to access. Sign up for an
account today to start using our lexical data to power your apps and
projects. Get started today and enter our developer competition.
http://sdm.link/oxford
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: GEDCOM Tags recognised but not supported

Harvey Nimmo
On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 11:25 +0100, Harvey Nimmo wrote:

> No, as far as I can tell! I tried looking for the (10-year-old!)
> Bug/Feature request in Mantis with no success! So I wonder if it has
> been 'retired'. But again, maybe I'm too dim to know how to find it.
> I
> thought I had added a note to it, but it doesn't turn up in the
> filter.
>
> Is there an easy way to edit a GEDCOM file to replace _LOC tags with
> standard Gedcom 5.5 tags? I don't really want to learn GEDCOM
> 'language'.
>
> Cheers
> Harvey
>
>  
>
>
> On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 01:26 -0800, m.miesbauer wrote:
> >
> > Hi Harvey, 
> >
> > did you get a solution, how to replace the _LOC tags with standard
> > Gedcom
> > 5.5 tags? 
> >
> > Thanks 
> > Markus

...sorry for the top post...the habit of a lifetime :-)

The feature request is #688 at
https://gramps-project.org/bugs/view.php?id=688

There has been no movement on it.

Cheers
Harvey

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Announcing the Oxford Dictionaries API! The API offers world-renowned
dictionary content that is easy and intuitive to access. Sign up for an
account today to start using our lexical data to power your apps and
projects. Get started today and enter our developer competition.
http://sdm.link/oxford
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: GEDCOM Tags recognised but not supported

m.miesbauer
In reply to this post by Harvey Nimmo
In the file of the bug request (Vorfahren von Zacharias Bötticher.ged) the _LOC entries  only contains the PLAC names e.g.:
0 @P41@ _LOC
1 NAME St. Aegidien Osterode

and this NAME is already given to the PLAC tag:
0 @I1@ INDI
1 NAME Zacharias /Bötticher/
1 SEX M
1 OCCU Pastor
1 RELI ev
1 BIRT
2 DATE ABT 1610
2 PLAC St. Aegidien Osterode,,,
3 _LOC @P41@

So I think that no information should be lost from this import.
You can prove it in your program. If Zacharias Bötticher has the birth place St. Aegidien Osterode.
Everything's OK.

Greetings
Markus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: GEDCOM Tags recognised but not supported

Harvey Nimmo
On Wed, 2017-03-08 at 04:22 -0800, m.miesbauer wrote:

> In the file of the bug request (Vorfahren von Zacharias
> Bötticher.ged) the
> _LOC entries  only contains the PLAC names e.g.:
> 0 @P41@ _LOC
> 1 NAME St. Aegidien Osterode
>
> and this NAME is already given to the PLAC tag:
> 0 @I1@ INDI
> 1 NAME Zacharias /Bötticher/
> 1 SEX M
> 1 OCCU Pastor
> 1 RELI ev
> 1 BIRT
> 2 DATE ABT 1610
> 2 PLAC St. Aegidien Osterode,,,
> 3 _LOC @P41@
>
> So I think that no information should be lost from this import.
> You can prove it in your program. If Zacharias Bötticher has the
> birth place
> St. Aegidien Osterode.
> Everything's OK.
>
> Greetings
> Markus


Yes, you are right. The import still complains about the _LOC tags but
the PLAC tag is imported without error. Thanks for the tip.

Cheers
Harvey


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Announcing the Oxford Dictionaries API! The API offers world-renowned
dictionary content that is easy and intuitive to access. Sign up for an
account today to start using our lexical data to power your apps and
projects. Get started today and enter our developer competition.
http://sdm.link/oxford
_______________________________________________
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Loading...