> That's precisely my own observation. I've done a few Google searches > only to find that nothing new seems to be happening with any standard. > It seems a shame that one of the most popular web topics and xml have > not really gone anywhere after all this time. Makes me want to start > something myself... but I'm not sure I'd have the time to finish it > either... Perhaps this community or some other LDS OS community ought > to give it a try... Okay, I'll stop thinking out loud now...
That's a good thought, but I don't know that another developer coming up with yet another genealogy modeling language is the solution. There are plenty of those out there already. Several other models out there were created by big names in the xml world, but I believe they haven't been successful because of lack of adoption, not because of lack of technical expertise. I don't know at this point that there is much reason for the genealogy application world to switch from gedcom. From the perspective of the developer, it is certainly nice to move to xml, but for your average family historians, they could care less about what the actual modeling language is. They just want to not lose information when they move data to another genealogy appllication. For software vendors, what use is there in spending precious resources on importing/exporting xml when the competing vendors generally don't import these other xml formats? Fortunately, I suspect the new family search could change this. Vendors may support the church's new format in the future, since being able to access to Family Search adds definite value to the end user. I belong to the genealogyXml group mentioned earlier and here are some questions on their FAQ about this topic: 12. Why isn't there a standard XML vocabulary for genealogical data? That's a good question but a touchy subject for many group members. The simple answer is that standards come from standards organizations, but there is no standards organization dedicated to computer applications of genealogy. Because GEDCOM 5.5 is widely-used, the LDS Church has become an inadvertent standards organization. However, the Church does not seem interested in developing and promoting a newer standard that is "open" or "universal". It can be argued that an independent group of professional genealogists and technologists would be better-positioned to create and maintain such a standard anyway. Over the past decade various individuals and small groups have tried to organize "grassroots" standards movements. These efforts have had little or no success. The lack of success doesn't imply that standardization is futile, but does suggest that it's difficult. 13. Couldn't the GenealogyXML group become a standards organization? It's possible but unlikely. This group was not founded with that intention, although there was once considerable discussion about changing the group's focus. Several members have expressed support for standards development, but creating a standard requires considerable time and effort (and probably money). Very few people have the interest, dedication, and resources to accomplish this. Even with sufficient resources, it is hard to imagine the creation of a true standard without broad input and support from the genealogical community. Jay _______________________________________________ Ldsoss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ldsoss.org/mailman/listinfo/ldsoss
