From: ttw@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (thomas.t.wetmore..iv)
Subject: Re: Elements of the perfect genealogical software
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 17:21:49 GMT

Quick followup to Tammy's post.

I agree with her assessment of the "two databases," and in earlier
posts to this group I have called them the "results" database (the
persons and families) and the "research" database (what Tammy calls
the "sources" and what I prefer to call the "events and sources").

A distinction must be made about the information in the two databases.
The research database contains facts about events and persons who were
called by certain names at some time in the past; these facts should be
viewed as having different "probabiltiy of truth" distributions
associated with them, as a function of their source.

The results database, on the other hand, contains a collection of
hypothesized persons and families, supported, but by no means
proven to exist, by the research database.  The links that Tammy
mentions between the databases are the supporting evidence links.

Beginning genealogists, IMHO, tend to forget that genealogy is a very
inexact science, and therefore miss the subtlety of the above.

On to her question: does genealogical software today handle this
approach.  I would answer, partially and inadequately.  My system,
LifeLines, does not.  Nor does PAF nor BK.  Others may want to speak
of other systems.

Here is an interesting example of how these two kinds of information
can get mixed up.  Take a typical IGI GEDCOM file from the LDS.  These
files (at least the ones I have used) contain EVENTS camoflauged as
PERSONS and FAMILIES.  The files are really collection of birth,
marriage and baptism events, but since the LDS can only provide this
information in simple-minded GEDCOM format, the events have to get
encoded as lots and lots of tiny families (eg, each birth event shows
up as three person records [the parents and child] and a family record
[binding them all together]).  In other words, an IGI file is
really a research database masquerading as a haphazard results database.
The typical reaction we all have when we import one of these files is "Oh
my God, look at all the people and families I'm going to have to merge
togehter."  More properly, we should be exclaiming "look at the
wonderful evidence that the LDS has provided me so that I can better
hypothesize who my ancesters were and how they were related," but I
won't quibble about the distinction.  It all comes down to the same
work in the end, and only the more pedantic among us (put me in that
category) worry about the distinctions.

====================================================================
Thomas T. Wetmore IV, AT&T Bell Laboratories, (508)960-6015 (work)
ttw@petrel.att.com                            (508)465-3220 (home)
====================================================================
WETMORE (1660-1992:Ct>World)    WHITMORE (1300-1660:Eng>Ct)
HANCOCK (1800-1950:Md>Ct)       BROWN    (1780-1900:Vt>Wi)
KANEEN  (1700-1900:IoM>Ct)      TRASK    (1580-1820:Eng>NS)
ESCOTT  (1700-1900:Nfld)        HARVEY   (1700-1900:Scot>Ire>NS>Wi)
EDMUNDS (1700-1835:Wales)       KISSACK  (1600-1850:IoM)
====================================================================
Xref: sparky soc.roots:8754 soc.culture.czecho-slovak:581