Ancestry.com and Gramps

[Richard Smith]

Does anyone have any experience keeping trees on Ancestry.com in sync
with Gramps? Both systems support export in GEDCOM, so in principle as
long as I only edit using one system at a time, once I've finished
editing I can sync export from the edited version, import to the other
system, and then edit it on whichever system I next want to use.

However I'm concerned as to whether the export / import process works
well enough for my data to survive dozens of exports and reimports.
Does anyone have any experience of this?

Is there a better strategy that would allow me to use either system to
edit my data?

Richard

[Tim Powys-Lybbe]

Ow!

I am of the opinion that there is no hope for GEDCOM and it should only
ever be used as a tool of very last resort.

The problem with GEDCOM is that there is no certification that any
system conforms to its standards. My experience of GEDCOM is that many
systems which advertise that they save and receive GEDCOM do so only as
an approximation and will make several mistakes at the detailed level.

Transfer in two directions, forwards and backwards between two different
and uncertified compliant GEDCOM systems, is bound to have problems. I
would stick with one of these as your master system for all editing and
the other just to accept whatever crumbs emerge from the process of
copying from one database to another by means of GEDCOM.

The now dying TMG (The Master Genealogist) had a system of directly
transcribing data from one system's files to another because GEDCOM
transfer was not reliable. But, tragically, TMG is no longer developed
or, I believe, supported.

--
Tim Powys-Lybbe t...@powys.org
for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/

[Richard Smith]

On 10/01/15 17:04, Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote:

> I am of the opinion that there is no hope for GEDCOM and it should only
> ever be used as a tool of very last resort.

Sometimes the last resort is also the only option. If you wish to get
data into or out of Ancestry.com, so far as I'm aware GEDCOM is the only
option. It does not support any export format other than GEDCOM, and it
has no public API to allow you to get data from it directly.

Richard

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sat, 10 Jan 2015 14:53:13 +0000, Richard Smith
<ric...@ex-parrot.com> wrote:

>Does anyone have any experience keeping trees on Ancestry.com in sync
>with Gramps? Both systems support export in GEDCOM, so in principle as
>long as I only edit using one system at a time, once I've finished
>editing I can sync export from the edited version, import to the other
>system, and then edit it on whichever system I next want to use.
>
>However I'm concerned as to whether the export / import process works
>well enough for my data to survive dozens of exports and reimports.
>Does anyone have any experience of this?

First of all don't trust the genealogies on Ancestry - or any other
commercial site. My great great grandfather has 9 sets of parents on
Ancestry and I can prove all of them wrong. The year of his birth is
also wrong. One person makes a guess about the line and everyone too
lazy to do the work for themselves copies.

If you are the one who has the most data on your lines, be very
careful. A lot of people will copy whatever you say.

Hugh

[Richard Smith]

On 11/01/15 05:00, J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:

> First of all don't trust the genealogies on Ancestry - or any other
> commercial site.

I don't often look at them, but the genealogies on Ancestry.com, like
those on the few other commercial sites I've looked at, are mixed. Many
are abysmal; a few are good. It takes effort to work out which is
which, and I find it's usually not worth expending the effort sorting
the wheat from the chaff. Once in a while I'll hit a brick wall, and
then it can be worth looking through online trees for inspiration.
Ancestry make it easy to locate trees including a particular ancestor,
and sometimes one or two may seem reasonably well-researched. Obviously
you shouldn't then blindly trust their data, but on several occasions
I've found it was fruitful to assess the

> If you are the one who has the most data on your lines, be very
> careful. A lot of people will copy whatever you say.

Why would this bother me?

Richard

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sun, 11 Jan 2015 19:36:10 +0000, Richard Smith
<ric...@ex-parrot.com> wrote:

>On 11/01/15 05:00, J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:
>
> > First of all don't trust the genealogies on Ancestry - or any other
> > commercial site.
>
>I don't often look at them, but the genealogies on Ancestry.com, like
>those on the few other commercial sites I've looked at, are mixed. Many
>are abysmal; a few are good. It takes effort to work out which is
>which, and I find it's usually not worth expending the effort sorting
>the wheat from the chaff. Once in a while I'll hit a brick wall, and
>then it can be worth looking through online trees for inspiration.
>Ancestry make it easy to locate trees including a particular ancestor,
>and sometimes one or two may seem reasonably well-researched. Obviously
>you shouldn't then blindly trust their data, but on several occasions
>I've found it was fruitful to assess the

I have subscribed to Ancestry for close to 20 years. What people post
there are merely leads for me to follow and prove for myself.

>
> > If you are the one who has the most data on your lines, be very
> > careful. A lot of people will copy whatever you say.
>
>Why would this bother me?
>
>Richard

I can't speak for you but it would bother me if I led someone astray.
Even the most careful researcher can make errors when the APPARENT
facts are not facts.

Hugh

[Richard Smith]

On 11/01/15 19:42, J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:

> I can't speak for you but it would bother me if I led someone astray.
> Even the most careful researcher can make errors when the APPARENT
> facts are not facts.

Caveat emptor. Obviously I don't publish anything I believe at the time
to be is false, and I will generally include a note expressing any
doubts I may have. I certainly don't publish works in progress.

Your point that even the most careful researcher makes mistakes is, of
course, true, but how does that differ with research in a printed book?
Take the Complete Peerage or Europäische Stammtafeln, both highly
regarded volumes, and both known to contain rare errors. Should these
works not have been published because their editors knew they might
contain mistakes?

If I make I mistake, I try to correct it wherever I previously published
it, and I'll include a note in any future versions I publish saying what
I previously believed and why I changed my mind.

Given the quantity of poor research published online, I rather think
those who believe they can produce better research ought to be
publishing it in order to gradually improve the standard of research.
Far better that someone copies my research than some of the other crap
that's available online.

Richard

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sun, 11 Jan 2015 23:05:21 +0000, Richard Smith
<ric...@ex-parrot.com> wrote:

>On 11/01/15 19:42, J. Hugh Sullivan wrote:
>
>> I can't speak for you but it would bother me if I led someone astray.
>> Even the most careful researcher can make errors when the APPARENT
>> facts are not facts.
>
>Caveat emptor. Obviously I don't publish anything I believe at the time
>to be is false, and I will generally include a note expressing any
>doubts I may have. I certainly don't publish works in progress.

I DO have a w-i-p on line. I have developed a scenario about umproven
ancestors linking them to the proven ones. I almost beg people to
prove or disprove but the facts are not available. I had no worries
when I put it online. It is unarguable but it is not proof.

>Your point that even the most careful researcher makes mistakes is, of
>course, true, but how does that differ with research in a printed book?
> Take the Complete Peerage or Europäische Stammtafeln, both highly
>regarded volumes, and both known to contain rare errors. Should these
>works not have been published because their editors knew they might
>contain mistakes?

My problem is not with carefully researched publishings but I would
plan to prove, disprove or accept the logic. I would not blindly
accept. Many people do and that leads to countless trees. exactly
alike, and people start to accept.

>
>If I make I mistake, I try to correct it wherever I previously published
>it, and I'll include a note in any future versions I publish saying what
>I previously believed and why I changed my mind.
>
>Given the quantity of poor research published online, I rather think
>those who believe they can produce better research ought to be
>publishing it in order to gradually improve the standard of research.
>Far better that someone copies my research than some of the other crap
>that's available online.

I have done that and it changes few minds. I can't convince a few
people that I was wrong about 15 years ago before I had DNA tests.

Hugh

[Dora Smith]

So, if I understand, you use Gramps, which is genealogical software that you can use in Linux or on a telephone or something of the sort, to do your genealogical data entry and produce the GEDCOMs you upload to Ancestry.

I've never heard of any way to synchronize your telephone with Ancestry.

I've never heard of any way to sync data on your computer with Ancestry either.

You have to create a new GEDCOM and upload it. If you've got documents and photos in your Ancestry database I guess they disappear, because there is no automatic way to upload them.

Most people just keep their genealogical data on Ancestry for the benefit of people who seem to be quite immune to looking at it anywhere else, such as at Rootsweb World connect, and your own web site.

I'd actually be amazed if Gramps does much, and certainly not at all easily; I once checked it out, and stuck with Rootsmagic.

[Dora Smith]

Advantages to putting your data on Worldconnect are that your notes and sources upload with your GEDCOM and display, so people who view your files know how you got your information and can evalutate it, and it's entirely free. Noone has to pay to search it, nor to access it.

Advantages to putting your data on your own web site are that you can display data in your own format, you can display your notes, you can display your media.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Sat, 22 Aug 2015 16:22:44 -0700 (PDT), Dora Smith
<vill...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Advantages to putting your data on Worldconnect are that your notes and sou=
>rces upload with your GEDCOM and display, so people who view your files kno=
>w how you got your information and can evalutate it, and it's entirely free=

>. Noone has to pay to search it, nor to access it.

The problem is if you put incorrect data for people to access... at
least 50 people copied and reposted it and you have to wade through
all of them and still not find the true facts. Ditto for Ancestry and
Family Search.

>Advantages to putting your data on your own web site are that you can displ=
>ay data in your own format, you can display your notes, you can display you=
>r media.

And, if you make an error it can be corrected without damage to the
next people addressing the site.

Incorrect info is becoming a worse problem than no info.

Hugh

[Richard Smith]

On 23/08/15 00:19, Dora Smith wrote:

> I've never heard of any way to synchronize your telephone with Ancestry.

What about my fridge? Can I synchronise that with Ancestry? Please
give me the benefit of your wisdom.

Richard

[Richard Carruthers via]

Only if you want to use it to store the ancestors you're working on!;)

> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> GENCMP-...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes
> in the subject and the body of the message
>

[Richard Carruthers via]

Must be Ricardian humour.

Richard;)

On 27/08/2015, Richard Carruthers <leli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Only if you want to use it to store the ancestors you're working on!;)
>
> On 27/08/2015, Richard Smith via <gen...@rootsweb.com> wrote:

[Denis Beauregard]

On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 15:30:41 +0100, Richard Smith
<ric...@ex-parrot.com> wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:

Perhaps to sync a cell phone application ? Is there any cell phone
application for genealogy ? They exist for many OS and some cells are
derived from them, i.e. iPhone/iPad from Apple iOS, Android from
Linux, Surface from Windows. So there must be some applications ?


Denis

--
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - www.francogene.com/genealogie--quebec/
French in North America before 1722 - www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/
Sur cédérom à 1785 - On CD-ROM to 1785

[Doug Laidlaw]

To Richard Smith, there is now an Internet of Things, on which
machines talk to one another. An early book said that XML would
allow your fridge to tell you what you could make with its
contents.

A cell phone is a bit small to display much. I have an Android
tablet, and it has apps available for Ancestry.com, Legacy,
MyHeritage, FamilySearch, RootsMagic and GeneaNet. I can't stop
the one for GeneaNet from crashing, and I think that the one for
RootsMagic is read-only.

I have tried to use Gramps several times, but it is so very
different from the others. A Gedcom exported from it could
probably be imported to anything else. I use the Ancestry app to
update my tree, on Ancestry.com, but it isn't very complete. It
gives you certificates and censuses for existing people, and not
much more. Now that the Ancestry.com Web site is almost unusable,
FTM is the best access. I keep my principal database on Legacy.

Doug.

[J. Hugh Sullivan]

On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 04:28:43 +1100, Doug Laidlaw
<do...@douglaidlaw.net> wrote:

>Now that the Ancestry.com Web site is almost unusable,

I need some help to learn why it is unusable. I must not be
sufficiently competent to discover the problems.

Are you perhaps speaking of an incompetent researcher posting
obviously incorrect data and it being copied by a host of other
incompetents?

Hugh