I only just saw this... Great news and good work!
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Mikkel Eriksen <mikkel.erik...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > An update: FamilySearch has now moved to accomodate our objections. > > - Java has been excised from the gedcomx repository and now resides in > a separate repo. > - They are aware of the documentation shortcomings, and are working to > address them. > > In addition, tonight a number of new proposals showed up that look > very interesting, especially regarding the "persona" construct which I > think could be a very good solution to the problem of conflicting > sources. I will continue to try and push them in a direction I feel > would support my needs, and I encourage you to do the same :) > > Regards, > Mikkel > > PS. I'll try not to "spam" this list about GedcomX any more! > > On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Mikkel Eide Eriksen > <mikkel.erik...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Took a little longer than expected due to other commitments, but I've >> created an issue here: >> https://github.com/FamilySearch/gedcomx/issues/228 >> >> Please comment as you see fit. >> >> Mikkel >> >> On 31/12/2012, at 22.39, Ron Savage <r...@savage.net.au> wrote: >> >>> Hi Mikkel >>> >>> On 01/01/13 03:45, Mikkel Eide Eriksen wrote: >>>> On 31/12/2012, at 17.31, Philip Durbin<philipdur...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On 12/30/2012 07:05 PM, Stephen Woodbridge wrote: >>>>>> 4. I didn't like the connection to Java either, I see no need for that >>>>>> in the spec, if there is some point that they are trying to establish by >>>>>> it, it would be better to just spell it out in details so people that do >>>>>> not work with Java have direct guidance. >>>>> >>>>> Right, I thought it was odd to read "the GEDCOM X data model is defined >>>>> in Java" at http://www.gedcomx.org/Code.html >>>>> >>>>> Likewise, http://www.gedcomx.org/Community.html says "The GEDCOM X >>>>> schemas and interfaces are defined in Java." >>>>> >>>>> Thank you, everyone, for the great discussion on GEDCOM X. It seems like >>>>> something to keep an eye on. >>>> >>>> I think I saw one of the devs (possibly Ryan Heaton @stoicflame) comment >>>> on an issue at some point that they were moving away from defining it in >>>> terms of Java and rather to have a language-agnostic spec with a reference >>>> implementation in Java. I can't find it just now, but in any case, I >>>> should think that would be the correct way of dealing with it. And if I'm >>>> not misremembering, that should be put on their site in big fat letters. >>>> >>>> Perhaps I'll open a ticket next year ;) if I don't find where they said it. >>> >>> Yes, open a ticket, politely but firmly reminding them that a Java-centric >>> view of the world is not the only possible view... >>> >>> Happy New Year! >>> >>> And here's hoping this year is even more productive that the last, which >>> for me at least, was very productive :-). >>> >>> -- >>> Ron Savage >>> http://savage.net.au/ >>> Ph: 0421 920 622 >>
