tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post5225760252473511721..comments2024-03-07T23:20:49.790-07:00Comments on Genealogy's Star: Is a unified family tree even possible?James Tannerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-77294894974185001092013-08-27T21:42:42.152-07:002013-08-27T21:42:42.152-07:00Thanks for sharing..Thanks for sharing..Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07486430981958687623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-63123105458767173882013-08-24T06:59:56.104-07:002013-08-24T06:59:56.104-07:00You are right about discussing this again soon. As...You are right about discussing this again soon. As I mentioned there are two different approaches to the problem; one addresses the needs of recording the background information about an entry, such as where, how, why etc it was created and the second approach concerns the content of the data field and how it can be integrated into a larger data context, i.e. exchanging data between database systems. An example of the first concern (structural metadata) is setting down a standard way of establishing the context of the information to be gathered in the "name" category. I could go on and probably will.<br />James Tannerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02989059644120454647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1527613590529958801.post-61643430924772734882013-08-24T01:57:18.884-07:002013-08-24T01:57:18.884-07:00I'm still not 100% certain of what you mean by...I'm still not 100% certain of what you mean by meta-data in this context James. I did a search through your previous posts but couldn't find an example. I thought it might be "extracted items of evidence", such as Age, Occupation, etc - something that the STEMMA model calls 'Properties' - but I could be wrong.<br /><br />The handling of evidence is non-linear, by which I mean that such Properties cannot, by themselves, give a full picture and be used to form conclusions. They're helpful, yes, but the context of when, where, and who else was present in that event, and even their lives, all need to be considered together. This is one of the few arguments I have against the popular concept of a 'persona' in the handling of evidence. Anyway, I'm sure this will be discussed again soon.<br /><br />Re: Online collaboration, though, even with a fully-agreed set of meta-data concepts, I would argue that the "single tree" approach is just too naive to work. Disagreements cannot always be resolved beyond doubt and so different researchers will have different opinions. You can see how this causes arguments in something like Wikipedia so it's hardly surprising that it cannot work smoothly for genealogy. I'm not saying that online collaboration isn't possible, though. Only that the simplistic single-tree models currently in use cannot work.Tony Proctorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18330460400737261264noreply@blogger.com