The Master Genealogist 4.0d Gold Summary
Export:
TMG offers its users a wide variety of GEDCOM export choices to compensate for some of the variations found in importation requirements of other programs. Users must read the GEDCOM export section of the manual before creating a GEDCOM file. For this test, the standard options were used.
TMG recorded but did not export the following:
Role (ROLE) tags
Alias (ALIA) tag
Physical description (DSCR) GEDCOM Tag coded as DESR in tag list.
Individual's address (ADDR)
Associate (ASSO) tag
Source media was also recorded on the supplemental screen along with the recorder, fidelity, and indexing information but none of this information is exported.
Tags exported in unexpected manner:
Nickname exported using NAME tag not the expected NICK. (This can be changed by user.)
The miscellaneous event tag (EVEN) exported data without the subordinate TYPE tag.
Sources:
TMG exports Citation detail using PAGE(page) and CONT(continued) tags. The PAGE tag is limited to 248 characters to accommodate those programs with field limitations. Tags with similar restrictions support the CONT (continued) or CONC (concatenate) tags but for some reason PAGE does not, resulting in data being truncated in some instances.
Call numbers were added to source title. This can require the use of the CONT tag in some instances with the resultant loss of data in those programs not supporting its usage.
Export rating 94.68 %
Import from:
Control file:
The Master Genealogist exception list documented the following difficulties with the control file:
The ROLE tag (role) was expected at level 3, it is coded at level 4 subordinate to an EVEN tag.
The CALN (call number) and MEDI (media) tags were expected at level one. They appear at levels 2 and 3 respectively under the REPO (repository) tag.
Sources using the 1 DATA, 2 EVEN, 3 DATE, 3 PLAC grammar had this information skipped. Other information in the source record was accepted.
The PEDI (Pedigree) tag was not recognized nor was the ADDR (address) structure.
Submission information and the associated tags were not processed. This is normal.
All notes coded at the zero level were not processed but appeared in the exception file.
Data transfer problems:
The prefix and suffix components of the name did not transfer.
The adopted child was recorded as the natural child in both families and her birth record appeared twice.
The PEDI (pedigree) tag was unknown which may account for the preceding problem.
The note attached to the ALIA (alias) tag appears under the individual's name. The cross-reference information is missing.
When a Temple code is supplied, the Temple location information does not transfer.
Status information for LDS events appears (in part) with the date information in the date field. Field cannot accommodate both with the resulting scrambling of data.
The following tags were not recognized but the data transferred. Some editing required.
REFN (reference number)
-
AGE (age)
PROP (property)
-
CAUS (cause)
-
CHRA (adult christening)
DSCR (description)
-
IDNO (identification number)
CREM (cremated)
-
ASSO (associated)
RIN (record identification number).
Notes:
The image information using the OBJE and subordinate tags transferred and linked properly.
A new individual was added to the database using the submitter information. In this instance the address data transferred even though the tag structure was included in the exception list.
The control GEDCOM does not use commas to identify missing place fields. This resulted in the information in the location fields requiring editing.
Summary:
Use of the NOTE tag (with a cross-reference to a 0 level note) at the 2nd level under INDI and 1st level under SOUR failed to transfer. The source and repository information, with the exception of the call number and media data, transferred very well. The information skipped when the DATA/EVEN structure was used appeared in other fields. Editing the data transferred with unrecognized tags could be time consuming but is not a difficult process.
Import rating 79.69 %
Ultimate Family Tree:
Imported directly using Genbridge.
Family Tree Maker:
Imported directly using Genbridge.
Generations Grande Suite 8:
The exception list for Generations Grande Suite 8 lists relatively few problems.
TMG notes the following media (MEDI) type descriptions as unknown: manuscript, fiche, electronic, and tombstone.
Several sources had the location information (PLAC) tag at level one. This was not acceptable to TMG. Generations exported several notes at the zero level. Three of these notes, referenced by the ANCI (ancestral interest), DESI (descendant interest), and ALIA (alias) tags, were not processed but the other notes at the zero level transferred properly.
Data transfer problems:
Generations created several problems in the coding of information for export.
All repository addresses were truncated.
Miscellaneous events (EVEN) were exported without a TYPE tag making it difficult to determine what the data refers to. The data itself transfers.
Ages (AGE), cause of death (CAUS) were coded as notes.
Married names were not exported.
Temple code (TEMP) and status (STAT) were exported as notes.
Image information was not exported .
Source information , with the exception of those PLAC(location) items identified in the exception list transferred properly.
Generations does not export ABBR (Abbreviations) for source titles.
Generations coded the citations using the TEXT tag and without the use of CONT or CONC tags. TMG attenuated these lines at 100 characters resulting in data loss.
0 level notes, with the exceptions noted above, appear as general notes under the correct individual.
Tags listed by TMG as unknown although in all instances the data transferred.
REFN(reference number)
PROP(property)
CHRA(adult christening)
DSCR(description)
IDNO(id number)
CREM(cremation)
RIN(record ID number).
Not recognized and data lost,
AFN(ancestral file number)
-
name prefix
TMG failed to make adoption link. Rebecca appears as natural child of two fathers.
Summary:
In the test file there was very little loss of data. The attenuated information could easily be recovered from the GEDCOM file. The unrecognized tag information is all there requiring only the user redefine the data tag type. It is rather interesting that TMG accepted some of the information Family Tree Maker rejected as coded improperly. This was primarily those items using the TEXT tag. Generations does not use the CONT or CONC tag for extended data. It simply uses another TEXT tag for each line.