Hi, First i don't see this thread to be off topic. Second, I have little intrest if family tree, but can clearly see other peoples intrest in the subject. I will Agree with Shawn's #3 Suggestion, and would throw in a #3a: Fork an existing project to get an initial boost.
At the moment i9 have very little time to offer, but that could change in the future. Oh, an Shawn, can you call me tomorrow ... Cheers Szemir On September 22, 2006 22:46, William Astle wrote: > Shawn wrote: > > I'm favoring option #3, but do not really have a clear picture of the > > requirements (yet). So, anyone want to hammer out the requirements for > > a multi user, web based geneology system with me? Maybe with these > > requirements we can better evaluate an existing system and save some > > development time. > > I've been through the research path on this myself and arrived at > "option #3" myself for similar reasons. > > One of the big issues I had with a lot of software is that it assumes > that a "family" is the basic unit of everything in genealogy whereas to > me it seems more logical that the "person" is the basic unit. The > "family" concept doesn't seem to handle things like multiple marriages, > unmarried couples, etc., very well. This "family is the core" concept > also appears to be codified in GEDCOM. > > Anyway, the thing to be really careful about with this sort of project > is scope creep. With Shawn's idea of what he wants to do, that is a very > real danger. It can easily explode into a general purpose store anything > about anything type of database. That said, I ran into exactly the same > desire to store more complete information. > > That said, I'm somewhat interested in such a project myself. _______________________________________________ clug-talk mailing list [email protected] http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php) **Please remove these lines when replying
