1) In More on Conclusion-Based and Evidence-Based Genealogy:
* Happy Dae offered an article about the subject on his Shoestring Genealogy site:
"You may also find the following interesting: http://www.shoestringgenealogy.com/article/Evidence.htm"
* Ed said:
"I have been reading some of the same discussions, and since I write code, decided to write myself an app for that. I anticipate two parts to - cataloging sources and the claims they support (assertions, facts, events, whatever); and then putting together a proof for specific subjects and facts.
"The question is what to do with the proof, and integrating the results of this new app with my genealogy software of choice (in this case RM5). I'm leaning towards using the PROOF document as the source for the facts in RM, knowing that the proof document itself will have citations to all the accounted for sources. However this makes it harder to 'share' sources, since the proof is unpublished.
"Obviously I am still mulling on this, but hope to have a working app in a few weeks."
"This is really a key element of the present GEDCOM system that is lacking as in the first paragraph above. Plus, the 7-Step Program breaks down in the GEDCOM system when you don't know which one of an uncertain number of individuals by the same name will turn out to be the son Willie Wonka mentioned in Charlie Wonka's will, and the goal is to establish which Willie is the one who was father of already proven ancestor Sam Wonka."
"None of this prevents genealogists from putting pen to paper to derive conclusions. It is simply a method used to gather all the relevant information about a person, and document where it came from. How it is used from there is open to our imaginations."
"I made a passing comment on BetterGEDCOM , fairly recently, that may have been lost in a Lilliputian discussion of Persona. The essence of that comment was that any new format for the exchange and long-term storage of our data must be able to represent all our data without bias or presumption about the process used to obtain it. In other words, it should be as applicable to rigorously and methodically derived data as to the naïve collecting of names and dates.
"This is a very fine line. It doesn’t dilute these discussions of best practices but a data format should be more concerned with being able to distinguish the types of data (and to link them together) rather than mandate a specific process for deriving them."