FamilySearch/gedcomx — Issue #143: ProofStatement has no meaning in Attribution
Author: EssyGreen
Created: 2012-02-19 08:47:11+00:00
State: open

Attribution is effectively documenting the creator of the Resource. (Which is also done via the Dublin Core description so this seems to me to clash.)

Proof, by definition, is the justification for some sort of statement, usually something like why A = B. But, whilst A could be assumed to be the Resource that the attribution is contained in, there is nowhere to define B so it doesn't make any sense.

In a genealogical sense the Proof is a weighing up of the evidence to form a rational conclusion. To use FamilySearch's own definition (see https://www.familysearch.org/learn/wiki/en/Genealogical_Proof_Standard):

>There are five elements to the Genealogical Proof Standard:
- A reasonably exhaustive search has been conducted.
- Each statement of fact has a complete and accurate source citation.
- The evidence is reliable, and has been skillfully correlated and interpreted.
- Any contradictory evidence has been resolved.
- The conclusion has been soundly reasoned.

Thus there must be a collection of relevant sources representing evidence/citations for the ProofStatement to make any sense. These are currently held in the "Conclusion" object. Ergo the Confidence and ProofStatement should be properties of the Conclusion and not of the Attribution.