Louis Kessler’s Behold Blog     The Behold User Forum

Dave I am running similar configuration to you. If you like, send me GEDCOM and I will see what it does here. I have had no problems on any size GEDCOM that loads into Behold. Brett

Push...push...push

The next version to be called 1.1 will be released soon. So, how many versions have been called 1.1, or should that have been: The next version, to be called 1.1, will be released soon ----heeheehee But seriously, keep up the good work and the small course corrections. I eagerly await 1.1

Thanks for the explanation. It was the 'set up a bit differently than other programs' that tricked me.

After import of GEDCOM, when I check the log file for full details, the following appears towards the bottom of the section. Only the first 100 of each type of message are listed. To display all messages: Uncheck the "Log File: Max 100 messages" setting under Organize -> Report -> Extra Info and reinput ...

Louis The following is created after GEDCOM export by one of the programs I use. Behold does not flag it as error or warning. 1 NAME Shown as First Middle Last on First2 Middle2 Last2's Marriage Record, NSW BDM 1891/999. 2 DATE 01 JAN 1891 2 PLAC Sydney, New South Wales, Australia However, one of the other ...

Louis Another date query. What is your (and therefore probably Behold's) interpetation of the following date: 03 Mar 2012 Is it valid or invalid GEDCOM 5.5.1 if it has the leading zero? Brett

Eagerly waiting for this correction. Any sign of 1.0.5 or will it be in 1.1??

I note the concerns Tamura has said re size of GEDCOM X files. Do you see a GEDCOM update as being significantly different in file size to that of 5 or 5.5?

Brett said: "GEDCOM X may end up being the only format in the running for this standard". Louis said: "GEDCOM ... could probably be fixed with one or two significant but not earth-shattering updates". So is/should an updated GEDCOM be a viable consideration for the standard? Does anyone else support your ...