Have you wondered what happened with the Reunion source types I had been creating? Let me tell you what happened.
As you’ll recall, I created custom source types based on guidance from “Evidence Explained” (EE) (see “source types” in the Reunion Tutorial Index). I also shared the process I devised for customizing Reunion source types. You may also recall that I revisited a couple of those customized source types to improve them.
That was the first sign of trouble, yet I pushed on because there was interest. Then two things happened:
- I realized that there is significant overlap between the fields used in the citation reference formats and teasing them apart and keeping it simple, true to EE, and GEDCOM compliant was seriously complex if not impossible.
- I became interested in (and have been) developing a simple, practical citation format that could be used with all the major genealogy applications and maintain GEDCOM compatibility. Heresy, I know!
I think I can create the EE based source types if I invest a lot of effort and do them all at once, but to make all the citation fields survive GEDCOM export and import I wouldn’t be able to continue to create separate, custom fields for each reference field in EE. The best I could do is create a cheat sheet to tell you what to put in each GEDCOM compatible mega field. The order of fields wouldn’t match those in the reference formats either. Essentially, I wouldn’t really be following the format in EE. It’s really a nasty mess.
By the way, the source template system in RootsMagic makes customizing source citation formats relatively simple, but I’m not confident of them surviving GEDCOM exchanges.
So I ask you, are bastardized EE source types something you want me to pursue? Are you interested in the practical citation format?