Re: New [GEDCOM 5.5.5] release and Gramps compatibility.

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
14 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New [GEDCOM 5.5.5] release and Gramps compatibility.

Nick Hall
On 08/10/2019 02:26, Sam Manzi wrote:
> In case you have not seen the announcement a new version of the GEDCOM
> specification has been released after twenty years call GEDCOM 5.5.5
> (the previous was 5.5.1 )
>
Thanks for letting us know about this.

At some point we may wish to write a GEDCOM 5.5.5 compliant export.

As far as the new features are concerned, we may wish to review our
gender support and relationship types.  I don't expect any problems with
same-sex marriages, birthdays (which should be stored as textual dates)
and centenarian support.


Nick.




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

Re: New [GEDCOM 5.5.5] release and Gramps com

GRAMPS - Dev mailing list
I suspect that the announcement of a v5.5.5 is merely a 'test balloon' to see if Tamura Jones can divert GEDCOM specification authority away from the LDS.

It is a good question whether the community is so starved for progress that they would be willing accept a self-appointed person (supposedly backed by a small group) as a standards authority. 

The PDF & Gedcom.org site show Jones as the sole copyright holder of the 5.5.5 specification. (Does that mean she has to be given approval rights or credited if Gramps supports v5.5.1? That smacks of the CompuServe GIF and Adobe PDF standards copyrighting fiascos!)  And, although she lists an array of well respected reviewers, there is no indication of the approval process or governance.

The other good question is whether this balloon will be be shot down as a violation of copyright.

Validating this with any code could be like stepping into a minefield.

-Brian

On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 10:40, Nick Hall
On 08/10/2019 02:26, Sam Manzi wrote:
> In case you have not seen the announcement a new version of the GEDCOM
> specification has been released after twenty years call GEDCOM 5.5.5
> (the previous was 5.5.1 )
>
Thanks for letting us know about this.

At some point we may wish to write a GEDCOM 5.5.5 compliant export.

As far as the new features are concerned, we may wish to review our
gender support and relationship types.  I don't expect any problems with
same-sex marriages, birthdays (which should be stored as textual dates)
and centenarian support.


Nick.





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


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

Re: New [GEDCOM 5.5.5] release and Gramps com

GRAMPS - Dev mailing list
Sorry. I don't know the gender of Tamura. Revealed an American bias in making that assumption based on a given name ending with an 'a'. 

Please substitute gender neutral pronouns.

-Brian


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

Re: New [GEDCOM 5.5.5] release and Gramps com

Brylie Christopher Oxley
It might also be helpful to assume good faith when uncertain about the motivations behind a person's actions.

Kind regards,
Brylie

On October 8, 2019 9:41:48 PM GMT+03:00, Emyoulation--- via Gramps-devel <[hidden email]> wrote:
Sorry. I don't know the gender of Tamura. Revealed an American bias in making that assumption based on a given name ending with an 'a'. 

Please substitute gender neutral pronouns.

-Brian

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

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

Re: New [GEDCOM 5.5.5] release and Gramps com

enno
In reply to this post by GRAMPS - Dev mailing list
Op 08-10-19 om 20:41 schreef Emyoulation--- via Gramps-devel:
> Sorry. I don't know the gender of Tamura. Revealed an American bias in
> making that assumption based on a given name ending with an 'a'.

Tamura is a guy. If he were a gal, the name would probably be Tamara.

Speaking about bias: When I read the name Jan, I think of a guy, like
dr. Jan Pol, a fellow Dutchman, whose name is equivalent to John, or
Juan. For most English speaking people, Jan is a gal, right?

Enno




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

Re: New [GEDCOM 5.5.5] release and Gramps com

GRAMPS - Dev mailing list
In reply to this post by Brylie Christopher Oxley
Good faith is fine. But protecting the open source copyright puts some constraints on the project.  

Even looking at code & specifications from a more restricted copyright product can keep a Developer from contributing similar code without protecting at the more restricted level.

Before your know it, the distribution prerequisites becomes very complex.

-Brian



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

Re: New [GEDCOM 5.5.5] release and Gramps com

enno
In reply to this post by GRAMPS - Dev mailing list
Op 08-10-19 om 20:32 schreef Emyoulation--- via Gramps-devel:
I suspect that the announcement of a v5.5.5 is merely a 'test balloon' to see if Tamura Jones can divert GEDCOM specification authority away from the LDS.
Maybe so, but knowing that there is no substantial other standard, since FHISO sort of adopted GEDCOM too with their ELF, and GEDCOM-X hasn't gotten any further that being used in the FamilySearch API, in commercial programs talking to the FamilySearch tree, GEDCOM is still alive.

It is a good question whether the community is so starved for progress that they would be willing accept a self-appointed person (supposedly backed by a small group) as a standards authority.

Well, that is how real standards work, like GIF and PDF. Standards created by committees mostly fail, like the ISO networking stack, Posix and other Unix 'standards'. Real standards are created by single entities with power and/or a large group of followers, think Linux, TCP/IP, Windows.

And although the group is small, I found one big guy in the press release:

MyHeritage CEO Gilad Japhet bought and donated the gedcom.org domain
This still leaves a question about copyright indeed.

Cheers,

Enno




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

Re: New [GEDCOM 5.5.5] release and Gramps com

John Ralls-2
In reply to this post by enno


> On Oct 8, 2019, at 12:44 PM, Enno Borgsteede <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Op 08-10-19 om 20:41 schreef Emyoulation--- via Gramps-devel:
>> Sorry. I don't know the gender of Tamura. Revealed an American bias in making that assumption based on a given name ending with an 'a'.
>
> Tamura is a guy. If he were a gal, the name would probably be Tamara.
>
> Speaking about bias: When I read the name Jan, I think of a guy, like dr. Jan Pol, a fellow Dutchman, whose name is equivalent to John, or Juan. For most English speaking people, Jan is a gal, right?

Enno,

In most English-speaking countries, yes, "Jan" is assumed to be a shortening of Janet or Janice absent any other information and those are names usually given to girls.

Regards,
John Ralls

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

Re: New [GEDCOM 5.5.5] release and Gramps com

Gustav Tiger
In reply to this post by GRAMPS - Dev mailing list
Wouldn't there be a similar situation for the 5.5.1 version which Gramps also uses? That document states "Copyright © 1987, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1999 by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This  document may be copied for purposes of review only. It must not be used for programming of genealogical software while in draft, All other rights reserved."

Cheers,
Tiger

On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 9:46 PM Emyoulation--- via Gramps-devel <[hidden email]> wrote:
Good faith is fine. But protecting the open source copyright puts some constraints on the project.  

Even looking at code & specifications from a more restricted copyright product can keep a Developer from contributing similar code without protecting at the more restricted level.

Before your know it, the distribution prerequisites becomes very complex.

-Brian

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


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

Re: New [GEDCOM 5.5.5] release and Gramps com

Tom Hughes
In reply to this post by GRAMPS - Dev mailing list
On 08/10/2019 19:32, Emyoulation--- via Gramps-devel wrote:

> The PDF & Gedcom.org site show Jones as the sole copyright holder of the
> 5.5.5 specification. (Does that mean she has to be given approval rights
> or credited if Gramps supports v5.5.1? That smacks of the CompuServe GIF
> and Adobe PDF standards copyrighting fiascos!)  And, although she lists
> an array of well respected reviewers, there is no indication of the
> approval process or governance.

Copyright on a specification document has no effect on code written
based on the specification unless it actually contains code samples or
something that are copied.

The issue with GIF was not copyright, but patents on the algorithms
used. I'm not familiar with the PDF case but it may well be the same.

Copyright on the specification does of course affect the ability for
people to distribute it to the people that may need to read it in order
to write code based on it, so it is a tool that can be used to limit
distribution of a specification to people who have agreed only to use
it in certain ways.

The license conditions applying to distribution of the 5.5.5 spec are
extremely unclear but there is an implication that they allow everything
that the license on previous versions allowed, which specifically
allowed copying (and hence distribution) for the purposes of writing
genealogical software.

Tom

--
Tom Hughes ([hidden email])
http://compton.nu/


_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-devel
--
Tom Hughes (tom@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New [GEDCOM 5.5.5] release and Gramps com

GRAMPS - Dev mailing list
In reply to this post by Gustav Tiger
Hi all,

being a member of the German association for computer genealogy (CompGen/genealogy.net), I just wanted to point out that this issue seems to be discussed also quite intensively by the developers of German Gramps competitors (there is actually quite many of them, all proprietary). In the past few years they have come up with some common conventions how to deal with custom tags etc. (see e.g. this wiki entry 
http://wiki-en.genealogy.net/Gedcom_5.5EL although this is now deprecated and only discussed on a mailing list whose archive is not accessible unless you subscribe to the list, https://list.genealogy.net/mm/listinfo/gedcom-l), and now several of these conventions seem to be forbidden by 5.5.5. Apparently they were also caught by surprise. Just mentioning this because GEDCOM is what users will need to use when hopefully migrating from these programs to Gramps at some point :)

Cheers,
David



‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Am Mittwoch, Oktober 9, 2019 12:07 PM schrieb Gustav Tiger <[hidden email]>:

Wouldn't there be a similar situation for the 5.5.1 version which Gramps also uses? That document states "Copyright © 1987, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1999 by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This  document may be copied for purposes of review only. It must not be used for programming of genealogical software while in draft, All other rights reserved."

Cheers,
Tiger

On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 9:46 PM Emyoulation--- via Gramps-devel <[hidden email]> wrote:
Good faith is fine. But protecting the open source copyright puts some constraints on the project.  

Even looking at code & specifications from a more restricted copyright product can keep a Developer from contributing similar code without protecting at the more restricted level.

Before your know it, the distribution prerequisites becomes very complex.

-Brian

_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list



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

Re: New [GEDCOM 5.5.5] release and Gramps com

Nick Hall
I have started a thread on the FHISO public mailing list.  Albert Emmerich has already replied.  It will be interesting to read his group's final analysis.

Our current policy is to attempt to import any versions of GEDCOM that are widely used.

At the moment export to GEDCOM is lossy.  If I have time I may investigate what custom tags would be required for a lossless export.


Nick.


On 09/10/2019 11:44, David Straub via Gramps-devel wrote:
Hi all,

being a member of the German association for computer genealogy (CompGen/genealogy.net), I just wanted to point out that this issue seems to be discussed also quite intensively by the developers of German Gramps competitors (there is actually quite many of them, all proprietary). In the past few years they have come up with some common conventions how to deal with custom tags etc. (see e.g. this wiki entry 
http://wiki-en.genealogy.net/Gedcom_5.5EL although this is now deprecated and only discussed on a mailing list whose archive is not accessible unless you subscribe to the list, https://list.genealogy.net/mm/listinfo/gedcom-l), and now several of these conventions seem to be forbidden by 5.5.5. Apparently they were also caught by surprise. Just mentioning this because GEDCOM is what users will need to use when hopefully migrating from these programs to Gramps at some point :)

Cheers,
David



‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Am Mittwoch, Oktober 9, 2019 12:07 PM schrieb Gustav Tiger <[hidden email]>:

Wouldn't there be a similar situation for the 5.5.1 version which Gramps also uses? That document states "Copyright © 1987, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1999 by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This  document may be copied for purposes of review only. It must not be used for programming of genealogical software while in draft, All other rights reserved."

Cheers,
Tiger

On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 9:46 PM Emyoulation--- via Gramps-devel <[hidden email]> wrote:
Good faith is fine. But protecting the open source copyright puts some constraints on the project.  

Even looking at code & specifications from a more restricted copyright product can keep a Developer from contributing similar code without protecting at the more restricted level.

Before your know it, the distribution prerequisites becomes very complex.

-Brian

_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list



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




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

Re: New [GEDCOM 5.5.5] release and Gramps com

Jeff D
Lossless gedcom data export, what sorts of data is not exported? 

Jeff



Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

-------- Original message --------
From: Nick Hall <[hidden email]>
Date: 10/10/19 10:01 AM (GMT-06:00)
Subject: Re: [Gramps-devel] New [GEDCOM 5.5.5] release and Gramps com

I have started a thread on the FHISO public mailing list.  Albert Emmerich has already replied.  It will be interesting to read his group's final analysis.

Our current policy is to attempt to import any versions of GEDCOM that are widely used.

At the moment export to GEDCOM is lossy.  If I have time I may investigate what custom tags would be required for a lossless export.


Nick.


On 09/10/2019 11:44, David Straub via Gramps-devel wrote:
Hi all,

being a member of the German association for computer genealogy (CompGen/genealogy.net), I just wanted to point out that this issue seems to be discussed also quite intensively by the developers of German Gramps competitors (there is actually quite many of them, all proprietary). In the past few years they have come up with some common conventions how to deal with custom tags etc. (see e.g. this wiki entry 
http://wiki-en.genealogy.net/Gedcom_5.5EL although this is now deprecated and only discussed on a mailing list whose archive is not accessible unless you subscribe to the list, https://list.genealogy.net/mm/listinfo/gedcom-l), and now several of these conventions seem to be forbidden by 5.5.5. Apparently they were also caught by surprise. Just mentioning this because GEDCOM is what users will need to use when hopefully migrating from these programs to Gramps at some point :)

Cheers,
David



‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Am Mittwoch, Oktober 9, 2019 12:07 PM schrieb Gustav Tiger <[hidden email]>:

Wouldn't there be a similar situation for the 5.5.1 version which Gramps also uses? That document states "Copyright © 1987, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1999 by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This  document may be copied for purposes of review only. It must not be used for programming of genealogical software while in draft, All other rights reserved."

Cheers,
Tiger

On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 9:46 PM Emyoulation--- via Gramps-devel <[hidden email]> wrote:
Good faith is fine. But protecting the open source copyright puts some constraints on the project.  

Even looking at code & specifications from a more restricted copyright product can keep a Developer from contributing similar code without protecting at the more restricted level.

Before your know it, the distribution prerequisites becomes very complex.

-Brian

_______________________________________________
Gramps-devel mailing list



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




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

Re: New [GEDCOM 5.5.5] release and Gramps com

Nick Hall
On 10/10/2019 18:04, digital0xff wrote:
> Lossless gedcom data export, what sorts of data is not exported?
>
There is a list here:

https://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php/Gramps_and_GEDCOM


Nick.




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