[TSC-public] Progress on ELF

Richard Smith rsmith at fhiso.org
Tue Oct 31 19:37:24 CDT 2017

On 27/10/17 19:18, Nick Hall wrote:
> On 27/10/17 18:12, Louis Kessler wrote:
>> Also, the following tags are of concern and are seen "in the wild"
>> and used or misused occasionally. What is ELF's position on these: AKA,
> Yes.  You will also see the following, and more, "in the wild":

We discussed cases like this at the TSC meeting earlier this evening. 
We haven't made a decision on any specific tag that is an extension to 
GEDCOM, but we have decided that we are happy with the principle of 
including such tags when there are sufficiently many independent and 
compatible implementations.  Almost certainly support for such tags will 
be optional.  That means a conformant application must either ignore the 
tag or handle it in accordance with the ELF standard, but must not 
handle it incompatibly with the standard.

> The payload of standard tags can be used in non-standard ways. Using the
> example given earlier:
>      0 SOUR
>      1 REPO
>      2 CALN
>      3 MEDI
> The REPO tag should contain a pointer in its payload.  However, you will
> also encounter an empty payload (FTM) or a repository name (Heredis 8).

We also discussed cases like this, and in particular the ALIA tag. 
Again, we made no decision about any specific tag, but we decided that 
if the non-standard use is sufficiently common, and if it can be 
distinguished programmatically from the GEDCOM-compliant use, we are 
happy with the principle of documenting non-standard uses in ELF.  If 
there's a satisfactory equivalent GEDCOM-compliant representation of the 
same data, we may recommend that applications convert the non-standard 
use to a standard use.

Richard Smith,                       FHISO   <http://fhiso.org/>
FHISO Technical Co-Coordinator       One Community, One Standard

More information about the TSC-public mailing list