5.5.1 compliant GEDCOM file - Categorized in: General Discussion

After several years, much assistance from Behold's great GEDCOM validation, advice from Louis and support from Darrin and the User Group of The Next Generation of Genealogy Sitebuilding (TNG), I now have a GEDCOM exported file which meets 5.5.1.

What a pleasure it was to see
'No problems to report.'
in the File Information section of The Everything Report and
'Summary of all GEDCOM Messages
No problems to report.'
in the log file.

Thanks all for the assistance.

Brett

OK, so I did jump too early.

I have validated through the above and also Genealogica Grafica and GenMatcher.

I will report all errors in an email.

In the meantime, the one error of most interest is:

Invalid content for DATE tag: '28 APR 1997' is not a valid <DATE_VALUE>

This does not error in Behold. Note the 2 spaces between APR and 1997.

Thanks
Brett

Louis

Does the GEDCOM character limit include the TAG?

If no, would this be suitable for vs and date?

VERS xx.x.x mm-dd-yy

Brett

Following your excellent advice here is the report from GedInline:

*** Line 11: Invalid content for CHAR tag: 'ANSI' is not a valid <CHARACTER_SET>
*** Line 36: Tag NOTE is not allowed under SUBM
*** Line 51: Invalid content for QUAY tag: '4' is not a valid <CERTAINTY_ASSESSMENT>
*** Line 73: Invalid content for QUAY tag: '4' is not a valid <CERTAINTY_ASSESSMENT>
*** Line 9946: Line contains tab character, not allowed under GEDCOM rules
*** Line 13032: Line contains tab character, not allowed under GEDCOM rules
*** Line 13322: Line contains tab character, not allowed under GEDCOM rules
*** Line 14296: Line contains tab character, not allowed under GEDCOM rules
*** Line 43757: Line contains tab character, not allowed under GEDCOM rules

I've no idea of how the tabs wound up in the file, but they will be gone shortly :) Likewise a fix for the rest, easy enough to do once you know what is what!

I notice that this is an addition to a older post, but I thought you would like the information to add to the list of clean file versus validators. VgedX only reports un-referenced individuals as do you as mentioned. You might at some point add a 'take me to the problem feature'---just a thought :)

Louis,

I got to looking at the list while repairing it and noticed that the line that says:

*** Line 36: Tag NOTE is not allowed under SUBM

is quite clearly in-correct! Certainly allowed under 5.6 and 5.5.1 (which I use) but not allowed under 5.5. Makes me wonder how they parse the GEDC.VERS<VERSION_NUMBER>? I always (for no particular reason that I remember) simply use a dotted numeric string; 5.5.1. I believe that I got the idea from PAF, likewise from the example show on pages 60, 74 and 78 of the 5.5 standard, the 5.5.1 standard and the 'draft' 5.6 standard. I might ask them come to think of it!