Dead End Genealogy

I received the following comment from a reader from a post I did more than a year ago:

I refuse to give my my ancient copy of PAF. If you can find the source files, it can be loaded onto any PC and run successfully. I simply copied my files from an old hard drive wthat was no longer in use, and it ran on my windows 10 computer without issue.

We often talk about genealogical brick walls when we can't find a person we are looking for, but this is another more insidious problem. Dead End Genealogy occurs when a person refuses to collaborate with others and continues to use outmoded technology. Dead End Genealogy almost always results in the individual losing all of the information they have accumulated due to the death of the genealogist or to a simple loss of data. Of course, I cannot tell from this comment whether or not the person who is still trying to use Personal Ancestral File has some other venue for compiling genealogical data, but the fact that the comment involves a program that was discontinued raises some serious questions.

This comment prompted me to go back through some of my other older blog posts and see what was actually going on. Here is one quote from a previous blog post also back in 2018.

However, the PAF issue goes much deeper than just that one program. It is symptomatic of a deeper issue with genealogists and technology. I just recently spent almost an hour with two different people trying to retrieve their logins and passwords to FamilySearch.org. You can guess that both of these people are not young. You might not realize it if you are reading this blog post, but most of the younger people I know would not even realize that desktop computer programs for genealogy even exist, much less be interested in using a program that was discontinued before they were born. 

For me, PAF is the genealogical symbol the digital divide; the outward and obvious indication that a huge segment of the genealogical community is simply out of touch with technology. That is the main reason this subject comes up periodically and will continue to be a subject for comment until the program really dies.

I found additional blog posts back in 2017, 2016, and way back in 2010. Here is another quote from a post in 2016.

In 1984, Personal Ancestral File, was a remarkable and innovative program for creating a personal, genealogical database. GEDCOM support was added in 1986 with version 2.0 for DOS, Apple II and CP/M. There were a number of revisions to the program. The Macintosh version was PAF 2.31 released in 1994 and was never upgraded and so ultimately stopped working on the newer Macintosh computers. The PC version of the program was upgraded from DOS to Win9x/NT in 1999. The last upgrade, to version 5.2 occurred in July of 2002. 

When I looked at my calendar today, I saw that this is 2019. I have quite a few grandchildren who were not even born when Personal Ancestral File was last upgraded. At this point, I am not certain whether or not my comments about Personal Ancestral File apply to the program itself or to the Windows operating system. But I am certain that Microsoft discontinued support of Win9x/NT. Checking with the article from Wikipedia entitled Wikipedia: Windows NT I find that Windows 9x/NT was first introduced in 1993 (26 years ago if you do the math). The last version of Windows NT version 4.0 was released in 1996. Since then, there have been almost twenty updated versions of Windows culminating in Windows 10 released in 2015. I sort of looks like Microsoft may be caught in a time warp also.

Part of the motivation for writing again on this subject was that this last week I spent a considerable amount of time trying to help someone who was trying to do some genealogical work on an old computer running Windows Vista which only lasted from 2007 until about 2009. How long will the old DOS-based software continue to run on Windows computers? It looks like it might still be a long time. But does this mean that the old PAF program should continue its Zombie run in the genealogical community? How long will it be before I never have to hear about this program again or offer support to people who are running an operating system that gets constant errors about online programs that will not run on their machine? Here is my conclusion from a post in 2016.

The program will continue to haunt us as long as there are people who do not recognize that the continued use of PAF is a problem not a solution to any problem.

If you find an old PAF file and if you can find a way to read the floppy disk or CD, do not decide you need to upload the program to one of the online family trees. We have enough of that old stuff already. If you still think that the information is valuable, go online to the FamilySearch.org Family Tree and start looking to see if everything in your old PAF file is already on the Family Tree. My experience is that almost everything on old PAF disks has long since been added to the Family Tree.

How well do you know your ancestors?

https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2018/12/americans-grandparents-first-names/578926/

This recent article in The Atlantic for December 28, 2018, got some attention in the genealogical community. The article claimed that one-third of all Americans could not name all of their grandparents. I would guess that this number is possibly low. Except for actively involved genealogists and a few others, most of the people I work with when I am in one of the Family History Center around the world and in the major libraries would be hard pressed to know the complete names of each of their four grandparents and would be completely lost in naming any of their great-grandparents. I have even had a recent experience in helping someone with their family research only to find out that the person did not know his mother's correct or full name. Another instance of this situation is the frequency of incomplete or wrong names entered in online family trees.

By the way, the information about the percentage came from an Ancestry.com Survey that was published back in 2007 so the findings are hardly new news. See "Survey Reveals Americans’ Surprising Lack of Family Knowledge."

Why is this the case? What difference does it make? A number of recent news articles have commented on the fact that Americans generally put family first ahead of country or religion. If we predominately put family first, why do we not know more about our families? I realize that my readership is primarily genealogists who can rattle off generations of ancestors, but what is there about our American culture that values family be doesn't seem to value it enough to remember their names?

Obviously, I am not a test case. I am doubly fortunate that my immediate ancestors had names that are easily remembered. But the issue of knowing the names of ancestors is only a shadow of the greater issue the encompasses the loss of generational traditions and culture. Nationwide, the national marriage rate is going down from 8.2 per 1000 in the year 2000 to 6.9 per 1000 in 2017. At the same time, it is estimated that about half of all the women have cohabited by age 30. See "New Report Sheds Light on Trends and Patterns in Marriage, Divorce, and Cohabitation." The rate of divorce has dropped slightly from 4.0 per 1000 to about 3.2 per 1000. See "Marriages and Divorces, divorcestatistics.org." It is entirely possible that the drop in the divorce rate is due to the rise in cohabitation and the drop in the marriage rate. What does this have to do with genealogy?

Think about the trouble you have had in finding the records of a mobile single person in the United States. How do you track someone who lives with a partner but does not get married especially if they continue to keep their single names and bank accounts etc? Do these statistics seem to indicate that there might be a problem with children from such homes knowing the identity of their grandparents?

As genealogists, we may feel insulated from the disintegration of the American family, but in reality, these statistics translate into a genealogical nightmare. A child raised by an unmarried couple may have no real concept of generational relationships and divorces likely result in separation not only from a parent but also from the separated parent's family.

 One of the things we can do is to try to record the relationships and families of the present time as much as possible even if the participants are not interested in family or ancestral relationships. Remember, a cohabitation arrangement does not produce any marriage or divorce records. It is also possible that the parentage of children born in these relationships will be hard to discover in the future. Perhaps genealogists, rather than be so focused on the past need to look to the future. In the past, there was a strong tradition of preserving family information in a family Bible or other writing and maybe we need to start preserving the memory of these people in our own way.

Step-by-Step Guide to Using Online Census Indexes: Part Four

In all the U.S. Federal Census records for all the years, there are millions upon millions of people named. The process of indexing starts with the selection of terms to include in the index. Obviously, the names of the individuals and some of the other information would be helpful in finding what would otherwise be a needle in a haystack. Without an index, the only way that the records could be searched would be named by name page by page. The U.S. Federalist Census was taken by geographic areas called enumeration districts. If you look closely at the screenshot from the FamilySearch.org website you might see a reference to United States Enumeration District Maps. If you were going to manually search the census without an index you could use the geographic divisions of the Census as a starting point and thereby cut down the number of pages and names that you would have to individually search. With today's digitized and indexed records, it is very difficult to imagine the amount of effort it would take to search through even one enumeration district's records.

It also seems hard to understand in today's world that almost all of the U.S. Census originally existed in only paper copies. Here is a short comment on the paper copies from the United States Census Bureau, History. 

Since the first census in 1790, the U.S. Census Bureau has collected data using a census "schedule," also called a "questionnaire." Between 1790 and 1820, U.S. Marshals conducting the census were responsible for supplying paper and writing-in headings related to the questions asked (i.e., name, age, sex, race, etc.). In 1830, Congress authorized the printing of uniform schedules for use throughout the United States. 

The 1940 Census included separate questionnaires to count the population and collect housing data. The 1960 and later censuses combined population and housing questions onto a single questionnaire mailed to households or completed during a census taker's visit. 

Between 1970 and 2000, the U.S. Census Bureau used two questionnaires. Most households received a short-form questionnaire asking a minimum number of questions. A sample of households received a long-form questionnaire that included additional questions about the household. The 2010 Census had just one questionnaire consisting of ten questions.

Think about it. Until microfilm came along, the only way for someone to search the U.S. Census was to go to the National Archives or other repositories where the records were kept, as look at them page by page. Since the 1930s when microfilming began to be common and with the exception of the 1890 Census, all of the other U.S. Census year's records have been microfilmed. The advantage of the microfilmed copies was that they could be duplicated and distributed around the country making it possible for more people to have access to the records. But the same problem of the need to search page by page still existed. The first level of organization other than the natural geographic division was a catalog arrangement. The schedules were cataloged first chronologically, then by state and county. Some major cities are listed individually. In these early days, the catalogs were on cards in wooden drawers. 

Because of the interest and the need to search through the census records, there were a number of privately printed indexes. Here is a quote from the U.S. National Archives article entitled "1790-1890 Federal Population Censuses -- Part 1."

Privately printed indexes are available for most States or territories from 1790 through 1870 and for the 1890 special schedules. For each state or territory, these indexes typically alphabetize surnames (last names) and then given (first) names or other names and initials of heads of families and specify the county, city, and possibly an MCD. The Microfilm Research Room, regional records services facilities, and numerous libraries or other institutions have many of these indexes, which appear in microfilmed, microfiched, or published form. Many schedules have different kinds of page numbers. Forewards to the indexes, though, usually explain the approach used and may include helpful aids such as census maps, histories, and bibliographies. Some indexes for early censuses also transcribe most census data from the schedules.

If the index was available, it would greatly reduce the time it took to search the census records. But all indexes have their limitations unless they index every word in the documents being indexed, Another problem was that there were few copies of the indexes and searching the census could still involve travel as well as work. Continuing the article from the National Archives, here is a short explanation of some indexes that were prepared by the U.S. Government.

The Microfilm Research room and the 13 Regional Records Services facilities hold microfilmed indexes that the Federal Government prepared for the 1790, 1810, 1820, 1880, and 1890 censuses. 

The Government Printing Office published and indexed the 1790 schedules of 11 States, along with Virginia data that was reconstructed from state enumerations from 1782 to 1785 and was intended to replace the missing 1790 schedules. National Archives Microfilm Publication T498, First Census of the United States, 1790, reproduces these works, which are also commercially reprinted. List of Free Black Heads of Families in the First Census, 1790, Special List 34, compiled by Debra L. Newman (Washington, DC: National Archives and Records Service, rev. 1974), indexes names of free black heads of families nationwide. The 1840 census of Revolutionary War pensioners is reproduced on roll 3 of T498. 

Index to the 1810 Census Schedules for Virginia (T1019) alphabetizes names, references counties, and notes volume, page, and line numbers of the schedules. Volume numbers that the index notes appear within the microfilm rolls, not in this catalog. Compilation of Tennessee Census Reports, 1820, National Archives Microfilm Publication T911, includes alphabetized indexes, partly transcribed data, and copies of an original 1820 schedule. Index to the Eleventh Census of the United States (M496) indexes the remaining 1890 population schedules. Roll 1 covers alphabetized surnames from A through J; roll 2, from K through Z. After the surname, the given or middle names and also initials are alphabetized. The numbers on the right-hand side for the cards refer to those stamped on the schedules.

Stay tuned for more about the indexing of the Census Records.

Here is a link to the previous posts in this series:

Part One: https://genealogysstar.blogspot.com/2019/01/step-by-step-guide-to-using-online.htmlPart Two: https://genealogysstar.blogspot.com/2019/01/step-by-step-guide-to-using-online_25.html
Part Three: https://genealogysstar.blogspot.com/2019/02/step-by-step-guide-to-using-online.html

Our Experience on Internet Radio: Big Blend Radio Interview

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/big-blend-radio

My friend Holly Hansen and I had a singular experience in being interviewed on an Internet Talk Radio Station. At least it was a new experience for me, but I understand that Holly is been on the radio quite frequently lately. We were interviewed on the Big Blend Radio program by Nancy Reid & Lisa D. Smith, the mother-daughter travel team on the 'Love Your Parks Tour' and publishers of the digital Big Blend Radio & TV Magazine and Parks & Travel Magazine. The topic of our interview was genealogy in the state of Arizona. We also talked about traveling around the state and some of the points of interest. This is part of the effort of Family History Expos to reach out to the greater potential genealogical community meaning the rest of the world that doesn't presently do genealogy.

Quoting from a report from Lisa D. Smith, Park Traveler, and Publisher of Radio Host:

The interview podcast is featured with Holly’s article on NationalParkTraveling.com and will be featured in the upcoming April-June issue of Parks & Travel Magazine, and in an upcoming Big Blend e-Newsletter. The podcast is also published on Spreaker.com, Soundcloud.com, Youtube.com, and on BlogTalkRadio.com which syndicates and distributes out to a number of podcast outlets including iTunes.com, TuneIn.com, Stitcher.com, Overcast.fm, MixCloud.com, ListenNotes.com, Spotify, and Player.fm, etc. 

In addition, she supplied me with a number of links to the interview:

Here are the main links (all easy to use on social media): 

- Podcast & Article on NationalParkTraveling.com -  https://nationalparktraveling.com/listing/arizona-family-history-research/
- Podcast on Spreaker.com - https://www.spreaker.com/user/big_blend_radio/arizona-family-history-research
- Podcast on SoundCloud.com - https://soundcloud.com/bigblendradio/arizona-family-history-research-with-holly-t-hansen-and-james-l-tanner
- Show on BlogTalkRadio.com - http://www.blogtalkradio.com/big-blend-radio/2019/02/15/big-blend-radio-arizona-parks-film-and-family-history
- Podcast on YouTube.com -  https://youtu.be/VkNQaLOqORc 

 This was quite an interesting experience and thanks to Holly and Big Blend Radio for the experience.

RootsTech 2019 is Almost Here! Here is your Survival Guide

https://www.rootstech.org/blog/survival-guide-rootstech-2019?et_cid=1304388&et_rid=107108866&linkid=CTA&cid=em-rt-8071

The weather reports for the Salt Lake City area are not very favorable for the week of RootsTech 2019. That looks like cold weather and snow. FamilySearch has been concerned about this and many other things that you should know about the RootsTech 2019 conference. They have published a RootsTech Survival Guide linked above. Some of the things that have changed for the upcoming conference include the following list send out by email. Here is a list of those things that have changed from past years:

Conference Updates 

In addition to increased customer service, here are a few more things we’re doing to make RootsTech 2019 a success for you:

• Free WiFi. We’re testing the Salt Palace’s new system and providing free, high-speed internet to all attendees, courtesy of FamilySearch.
• Increased Staff Support. You’ll notice an increased number of staff positioned throughout the Salt Palace to assist you. They’ll be wearing bright turquoise shirts that say “Ask Me Anything”. They can help you find your classes and assist you with any other needs.
• RootsTech Daily Rundown. Each day when you arrive at the Salt Palace, you’ll be given a printed handout with a summary of the day’s events and most popular classes. These handouts will also be available in the Documents section of the mobile app.
• Larger Classrooms. We’ve increased the size of classrooms and added a new room, the Ruby Room, which seats over 3,000.
• Trace.com Coaches’ Corner. Bring your biggest genealogy roadblocks and find answers at the Trace.com Coaches’ Corner in the Expo Hall. Over 400 slots are available with expert genealogists. Sign up here: https://coaches.trace.com.

If this is your first time attending RootsTech, then I would certainly advise you to review the Survival Guide. Here is the link: A Survival Guide to RootsTech 2019.

I hope to see you there.

Step-by-Step Guide to Using Online Census Indexes: Part Three

Page from the U.S. Federal Census for 1790

There is a 72-year restriction on public access to the census data and so the most recent census records that are available are from 1940. Most people will only see the information from one census become available during their lifetime. All of the main schedules of the U.S. Federal Census are now available online. Here is a list of the main online sources for digitized copies of the U.S. Federal Census records, however, you will need to search for the census records on these websites. This list is not exhaustive and you may find other digital copies on additional websites. Subscription websites are marked with dollar signs.

• The Internet Archive (archive.org) has the unedited copies of the microfilmed originals in the National Archives.
• FamilySearch.org Historical Records Collections
• CensusRecords.com $
• Ancestry.com $
• MyHeritage.com $
• Findmypast.com $
• 1940.Census.archives.gov

You might ask why you would use more than one of the digital copies of the census? The answer is that most of these online copies represent different digital scans of the original National Archives microfilms. The quality of the scans varies from copy to copy and also within the individual scanned copies. For example, here is a screenshot of a page from the census taken from Archive.org. By the way, should you wish to do so, you can download the entire census from 1790 to 1940 to your own computer. If you decided to do this, make sure you have a lot of free memory on your hard drive.

https://archive.org/details/populationschedu0467unix/page/n3

The Archive.org copy of the census records reproduces the original microfilm. All of the other copies of the census have been edited. There is often extra information on the original not visible in the other copies. However, the Archive.org copy cannot be searched by name. You will need to find the page you need first from one of the other online copies and then use that to find the same page on Archive.org. I am sure that very few people will want to do this on the chance that there is a little bit of additional information, but you should be aware that it is possible.

The most commonly used parts of each U.S. Federal Census are the Population Schedules. These are the listings of the individuals and/or households in the entire census area. However, there are are a number of non-population schedules that also contain valuable genealogically useful information. Here are short descriptions of each of these additional non-population schedules. The information about the content of the schedules is as listed on the National Archives website. These non-population schedules may be found online on Ancestry.com and FamilySearch.org. Bear in mind that these schedules may need to be separately searched.

Agricultural Schedules

The U.S. Federal Census Agricultural Schedules were taken in the years 1850, 1860, and 1870 and they provide the following information for each farm.

The name of owner or manager, number of improved and unimproved acres, and the cash value of the farm, farming machinery, livestock, animals slaughtered during the past year, and "homemade manufactures." The schedules also indicate the number of horses, mules, "milch cows," working oxen, other cattle, sheep, and swine owned by the farmer. The amount of oats, rice, tobacco, cotton, wool, peas and beans, Irish potatoes, sweet potatoes, barley, buckwheat, orchard products, wine, butter, cheese, hay, clover seed, other grass seeds, hops, hemp, flax, flaxseed, silk cocoons, maple sugar, cane sugar, molasses, and beeswax and honey produced during the preceding year is also noted. The 1880 schedules provide additional details, such as the amount of acreage used for each kind of crop, the number of poultry, and the number of eggs produced. 

Exclusions--Not every farm was included in these schedules. In 1850, for example, small farms that produced less than $100 worth of products annually were not included. By 1870, farms of less than three acres or which produced less than $500 worth of products were not included.

Manufacturing Schedules

As the United States was transformed from a primarily agricultural country into a manufacturing country, an Act of Congress dated May 1, 1810, mandated that the government make "an account of the several manufacturing establishments and manufactures." However, the Act did not specify the type of information to be collected so the actual information contained in the recorded records varies greatly. From the Archives.gov website:

Manufacturing schedules in 1820, 1850, and 1860 reported the name of the manufacturer; the type of business or product; the amount of capital invested; the quantities, kinds, and value of raw materials used; the quantities, kinds, and value of product produced annually; the kind of power or machinery used; the number of men and women employed; and the average monthly cost of male and female labor. The amount of detail reported in these schedules increased in 1870 and again in 1880. In 1880, supplemental schedules were also used for specific industries, such as for boot and shoemaking, lumber and saw mills, flour and grist mills. 

Exclusions--Small manufacturing operations that produced less than $500 worth of goods were not included on any of the schedules.

Both the Agricultural and Manufacturing Schedules can contain information including details that are not contained in the general population schedules. Both Schedules may also list people who were not residing in the particular area covered by the Population Schedules.

Mortality Schedules

It may seem rather strange, but the 1850, 1860, 1870, and 1880 U.S. Federal Censuses had Mortality Schedules. There are also some mortality schedules from 1885 in some of the state censuses. Fortunately for genealogical researchers, these records often contain information about people that the Census would otherwise have missed. The Mortality Schedules contained deaths in the year preceding the census year. Again from the Archives.gov website:

For each person, the following information is listed: name, age, sex, marital status if married or widowed, state or country of birth, month of death, occupation, cause of death, and the length of the final illness. 

Business Schedules 1935

The U.S. Federal Census Business Schedules contain information relating to advertising agencies, banking and financial institutions, miscellaneous enterprises, motor trucking for hire, public warehousing, and radio broadcasting stations. There were other more limited censuses taken in 1929 and 1933.

Censuses of American Indians

American Indians are not identified in the U.S. Federal Censuses for the years 1790 to 1840. However, the1860 Census began identifying Indians living in the general population. Beginning in 1900, Indians living both on and off the Reservations are included in the Census schedules. A more complete listing of all the specific census records for Indians is contained on the United States Census Bureau website. See History, Censuses of American Indians.

From time to time, it appears that an ancestor or an entire family has suddenly disappeared from the census. This is usually due to the index being inaccurate or the individual or family's movement to a new location but this possibility is relatively rare and searching the census schedules page by page may show the missing family especially when there is an indexing error.

Here is a link to the previous posts in this series:

Part One:  https://genealogysstar.blogspot.com/2019/01/step-by-step-guide-to-using-online.html
Part Two: https://genealogysstar.blogspot.com/2019/01/step-by-step-guide-to-using-online_25.html

Re-inventing Genealogy

There are four major types of genealogy programs: those that store information, those that provide information, those that teach about genealogy and those that assist in doing research. The distinctions between these four types of programs are blurred because there are a few multifunctional programs particularly those that have associated family tree programs and include a large database of digitized genealogical records. There are also a number of utility programs that supplement the activities of the larger online database/family tree programs. There are also a smaller number of games, activity programs, and even a few specialized scanners and other computer associated devices aimed at the larger genealogy market.

Several articles written in 2014 observed that "Genealogy is a 2-plus billion dollar industry that is expected to grow to nearly 3 billion by 2018." See for example this article from Forbes dated 23 November 2014 entitled, "Opportunity Is About To Knock So Get Ready To Open Your Door." This observation was made before the advent of the sale of the presently popular genealogical DNA testing kits. Online estimates of the growth of just the DNA testing market run from about $10 billion to over $22 billion in the next few years. How do these growth estimates compare to other market sectors? Well, reality is sometimes ignored when you start talking about money. For example, the worldwide market for yogurt is expected to be almost $89 billion in 2019 and grow to $107 billion dollars in 2023. In short, the market for yogurt is expected to be about four times the total of the entire genealogical DNA market. By the way, the genealogy DNA market is largely concentrated in four or five very large companies.

So what could possibly drive innovation in the genealogy market? What could happen to grow the market beyond current estimates that are largely based on the growth of DNA testing?

Right now, genealogy is mostly a solitary pursuit that has only begun to be computerized. The initial innovation in genealogy has focused on digitizing paper-based records. However, to liberate the information from their digital surrogates, the indexing process is still highly labor intensive. Granted, some genealogists can use the raw digitized records using time-honored techniques of searching individual records one at a time, but these individuals are not generally very few in number compared with the user base of the large online genealogy companies. Despite advances made in optical character recognition and handwriting recognition, these technologies have gained little traction in the genealogy companies. Automated record search programs rely entirely on indexed records.

Additionally, technological changes even those that measurably increase "genealogical productivity" face stiff resistance from tradition-bound genealogists. Overall, the genealogical community is highly fragmented and exchange of information obtained by individual researchers is, with few exceptions, locked into proprietary formats. The only widely accepted data exchange program for individual users, GEDCOM, is woefully out-of-date.

The small cadre of professional genealogists and those amateurs with similar skills are mostly unconnected with the much larger corpus of both serious and casual family historians. Professional genealogists are almost uniformly prohibited from publically sharing their work with the general genealogical population either by professional restraints or individual contract obligations. The idea of sharing genealogical information is further stifled by reason of the fact that many genealogists of all levels of expertise claim "ownership of their work."

It would appear that this genealogical logjam will prevent any real progress towards data unification and overall technological progress. What is needed is a way to re-invent genealogy. The first step in this direction needs to come from establishing a way to create a uniform data standard for the exchange of genealogical information. However, as long as each company, large or small, has its own proprietary set of data standards, such exchange of information is unlikely to occur. Since about 2012, The Family History Information Standards Organisation, Inc. or FHISO, has been working to implement data exchange standards, but although progress has been made in some areas, quoting from the FHISO.org website:

What file format will this standard generate? 

We believe it is unrealistic to produce an all-encompassing standard with the resources currently at FHISO’s disposal, and were such a standard to be produced, it runs the risk of being ignored, much as other attempts at a new standard such as the GenTech Data Model have been. 

Instead, our intention is to develop a series of standards each covering a narrow area. Over time, these will fit together to form FHISO’s new data model, but at first they are likely to be used in existing data models, in particular GEDCOM and GEDCOM X, which the FHISO Board have identified as the two dominant non-proprietary data models at present.

We have so much of our family history heritage that is lurking in fragments all over the internet and in libraries, historical societies, archives, and myriad other locations that are waiting to be integrated. Presently, genealogists have to individually remake the wheel. We have to individually create our own methods and every generation has to repeat and redo the work done previously. There is one small glimmer of hope in the FamilySearch.org Family Tree, but it will take dedication and years of work to create a reliable and trustworthy Family Tree. Meanwhile, we if we want to re-invent genealogy, we need to encourage and support efforts to integrate the data now scattered in millions of family trees into a workable one-source database that will help to eliminate duplication and help to correct the existing errors.