Strange behavior in GEDCOM import to WikiTree

+1 vote
63 views
Assume that the biography of an individual is represented in GEDCOM export as follows:

1 EVEN
  2 NOTE Description of event 1.
  2 SOUR Embedded source citation.
  2 SOUR @S10@
1 EVEN
  2 NOTE Description of event 2.
  2 SOUR @S20@

As the result of importing this into WikiTree is not acceptable and needs much editing afterwards, I do not directly import into WikiTree the GEDCOM file exported from my LifeLines database. Instead, I have made a LifeLines report program that creates a GEDCOM file in which all the events in a given INDIdivual record are represented as a single NOTE field:

1 NOTE Description of event 1.<ref>
  2 CONC Embedded source citation.
  2 CONC --- Title and archival signum from source record S10.</ref>
  2 CONC Description of event 2.<ref>
  2 CONC Title and archival signum from source record S20.</ref>

For some strange reason, in importing this into WikiTree, the last </ref> is changed to <ref>, thus causing a complaint about unmatching pairs of <ref>s and </ref>s when I try to save the imported individual.

Seppo Sippu.
in WikiTree Tech by Seppo Sippu G2G Rookie (160 points)
Is the last </ref> changed, or both?

Are you sure your listing is ok? The second event is a subitem of the first event.

Not sure what happens, but the second ref also misses the  'CONC Embedded source citation.' field. Maybe the import wants to see a reference inside of it?
Is the last </ref> changed, or both?
 
My example is an abstraction of what happened in the case of every INDI record in the two GEDCOM files I recently imported to WikiTree. In each case, the last (and only the last)  </ref> was changed to <ref>, although in every INDI record in the GEDCOM file I submitted,  the NOTE field (with CONCs) representing the sequence of events with sources for the individual had all its <ref>s and </ref>s correctly placed.
Are you sure your listing is ok? The second event is a subitem of the first event.
I do not understand this. An event that is a subitem of another event? No such thing in GEDCOM 5.5.

Not sure what happens, but the second ref also misses the  'CONC Embedded source citation.' field. Maybe the import wants to see a reference inside of it?
I do not understand this. The two SOURces of event 1 are of course included in the same
footnote <ref> Embedded source citation.--- Title and archival signum from source record S10.</ref>
Event 2 has only one source, S10, so the footnote for that event is
<ref>Title and archival signum from source record S20.</ref>
Seppo Sippu

So what I would have expected in your example:

1 NOTE Description of event 1.<ref>
  1sub1 CONC Embedded source citation.

  1sub2 CONC --- Title and archival signum from source record S10.</ref>
2 NOTE Description of event 2.<ref>
 2sub1CONC Embedded source citation.
  2sub2 CONC Title and archival signum from source record S20.</ref>
Instead you only give 1 event and 1 source with 2 sets of <ref> tags
If you want one event with two sources, I would expect 1 event with 2 sources. So no  2 CONC Description of event 2.
But, I would suggest you tag this question with 'tech' and 'gedcom_import' to attract some more eligible help. <ref> is not part of the GedCom definition as far as I know, so strange things might happen.
The GEDCOM file that I create for import into WikiTree is one that strictly obeys the GEDCOM 5.5 standard. Moreover, it is of the simplest kind one can imagine. It contains neither structured EVENt fields nor SOURces. Each INDIvidual record only contains one or more NAME fields, a single BIRTh field, a single NOTE field (with continuation lines), and a single DEATh event, all without SOURces.

In a GEDCOM file, each line consists of a level number, tag and a string of any printable characters, including characters <, >, /, r, e, f. No system that claims to be able to import GEDCOM should complain about it. Indeed, WikiTree did not complain about invalid GEDCOM. Instead, as I said in my first mail, the text that WikiTree had created from the imported file to be put into the biography of an INDIvidual was corrupted such that that the last </ref> appearing in the NOTE field (with continuation lines) of the INDIvidual was changed to <ref>, for some strange reason, leading to a complaint about unmatching pairs of <ref>s and </ref>s when saving.

Seppo Sippu
Just trying to think with you.

I am sure you know your business. But please do not overestimate the intelligence of the GedCom import of Wikitree. To many it is not the preferred method.

You can find the input field for tags when you edit your original question. A lot of people only read posts with the correct tags.

Please log in or register to answer this question.

Related questions

+4 votes
1 answer
166 views asked May 28, 2019 in The Tree House by Erik Oosterwal G2G6 Mach 4 (49.5k points)
+2 votes
2 answers
74 views asked May 5, 2020 in WikiTree Tech by Michael Smith G2G1 (1.8k points)
+4 votes
1 answer
76 views asked Apr 5, 2020 in WikiTree Tech by John Clement G2G1 (1.3k points)
0 votes
2 answers
109 views asked Dec 14, 2019 in WikiTree Tech by Ellen Smith G2G Astronaut (1.2m points)
+5 votes
2 answers
+4 votes
1 answer
+5 votes
1 answer
144 views asked Nov 29, 2016 in WikiTree Tech by Paul Gierszewski G2G6 Mach 5 (53.1k points)
+16 votes
2 answers
317 views asked Apr 29, 2016 in The Tree House by Gaile Connolly G2G6 Pilot (908k points)
+10 votes
0 answers
198 views asked Apr 17, 2016 in WikiTree Tech by Ellen Smith G2G Astronaut (1.2m points)
+7 votes
2 answers
62 views asked Dec 12, 2014 in Policy and Style by Steve Broyles G2G6 (7.1k points)

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...