Re: GEDCOM X

Hi Paul

On 31/12/12 08:19, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 30, 2012 at 10:13:53AM +0100, Mikkel Eide Eriksen wrote:
>> On 30/12/2012, at 05.08, Ron Savage<[email protected]>  wrote:
>>> On 30/12/12 13:46, Philip Durbin wrote:

> GEDCOMX seemed to arrive full of bluster, Java and XML, and gave the
> impression that the only unsolved problems were things like deciding how
> to store the XML and then just finishing the programming.  That was
> rather uninteresting to me.
>
> Far more interesting was the data model, and despite the programming
> going on, GEDCOMX didn't seem to have that nailed down.  And as far as
> it was exposed, it didn't really seem to build on any of the other work
> that had taken place in this area over the last decade or so.

I'm impressed by the amount of work which has been done, and a bit 
disconcerted where it ties in to Java. I do see the attempt to adopt 
material from the Java world, and elsewhere, but the link to Java seems 
a bit too tight for my liking.

Likewise adopting the Zip format, as its max size limitations become 
more and more apparent, given their comment about (optionally) storing 
everything in a single file (if I understood that, of course).

Overall though, I'm worried if they haven't over-specified things, in 
classic Java style, which leaves me feeling there may have to be a 
auxiliary spec answering the question: What are they really saying (at 
each point)? This would collapse several layers of definitions, if needed.

-- 
Ron Savage
http://savage.net.au/
Ph: 0421 920 622