Marco,
When you say "it doesn't exist" you are wrong. I come from telecom. Interoperability is a fundamental requirement. We connect two (or more) people or sites, for voice or data, over any combination of diverse technologies (copper, fiber, microwave P2P links, satellites, cellular radio, etc) using, simultaneously, multiple signaling systems (transfer protocols), some decades old, some from this year, of many different revision levels, that *all* have to interoperate from the physical layer to the top of the stack. It works. The entities involved are determined that it shall work. Not so in how genealogy vendors treat people's family history in one simple file format.
It is trivial to get GEDCOM interoperability:
1) Develop a rigorous test suite containing a number of GEDCOM files that exercise the various parts of the specification.
2) Run the GEDCOM files through the import, data manipulation and export functions of the products in the market (at each new release).
3) Prominently display the results on the internet, preferably at a site held in high regard.
4) Shame and reward the vendors as they have earned, and encourage customers to do the same. $$$ talks.
I know I can use proprietary software and keep my stuff portable *if* I am willing to discover the exact limits of whatever I choose to use, accept the LCD, and assume that will not shrink over time (as it is stated in this thread to have done in FTM2012). I see no motivation to go this route myself.
Read my posts - I'm not trying to start any movements. Everyone else in the world does what they choose. I'm saying what is best for me, and why.
My conclusion is that, according to historical evidence and current activities, GEDCOM is not driven, either by one dominant organization or a group of industry leaders, to be a modern, high-quality, ubiquitous specification with strict adherence by industry participants. It's obvious.
My conclusion that proprietary extensions of functionality that cannot be exported are of no interest remains.
Did you READ the page you linked on tamurajones.net on GEDCOM X? Visit the github site. One person was working on it until 7 days ago, now there seem to be two.
When you say "it doesn't exist" you are wrong. I come from telecom. Interoperability is a fundamental requirement. We connect two (or more) people or sites, for voice or data, over any combination of diverse technologies (copper, fiber, microwave P2P links, satellites, cellular radio, etc) using, simultaneously, multiple signaling systems (transfer protocols), some decades old, some from this year, of many different revision levels, that *all* have to interoperate from the physical layer to the top of the stack. It works. The entities involved are determined that it shall work. Not so in how genealogy vendors treat people's family history in one simple file format.
It is trivial to get GEDCOM interoperability:
1) Develop a rigorous test suite containing a number of GEDCOM files that exercise the various parts of the specification.
2) Run the GEDCOM files through the import, data manipulation and export functions of the products in the market (at each new release).
3) Prominently display the results on the internet, preferably at a site held in high regard.
4) Shame and reward the vendors as they have earned, and encourage customers to do the same. $$$ talks.
I know I can use proprietary software and keep my stuff portable *if* I am willing to discover the exact limits of whatever I choose to use, accept the LCD, and assume that will not shrink over time (as it is stated in this thread to have done in FTM2012). I see no motivation to go this route myself.
Read my posts - I'm not trying to start any movements. Everyone else in the world does what they choose. I'm saying what is best for me, and why.
My conclusion is that, according to historical evidence and current activities, GEDCOM is not driven, either by one dominant organization or a group of industry leaders, to be a modern, high-quality, ubiquitous specification with strict adherence by industry participants. It's obvious.
My conclusion that proprietary extensions of functionality that cannot be exported are of no interest remains.
Did you READ the page you linked on tamurajones.net on GEDCOM X? Visit the github site. One person was working on it until 7 days ago, now there seem to be two.