KFN wrote: ↑02 Sep 2022 20:46...
So my question is again,
What does a “root individual” provide in a GEDCOM. ...
Important question... Given that the concept isn't in current (i.e. pre-v7) GEDCOM Standards, it doesn't provide anything. Currently. From v7 it provides whatever v7 says it does... We hope.
From my viewpoint, it bases diagrams and reports in the same way that 0℃ bases the Centigrade temperature scale and 32℉ bases the Fahrenheit temperature scale (except it doesn't, I know!). It is so easy to re-base the root individual in FH that I can't get remotely excited about providing it in GEDCOM.
KFN wrote: ↑02 Sep 2022 20:46...
Merging GEDCOM into existing data is outside the scope of GEDCOM as a communication standard.
I beg to differ. I see a lot of users wanting to take a partial GEDCOM and merge it into their database. This is very much communicating. ...
Yes, merging the partial GEDCOM is communicating but the GEDCOM Standard
should be about data definition - how to deal with merging is not about data, it's about the functions that operate on that data. If the GEDCOM Standard were indeed only about data definition, then it
shouldn't define functionality.
In truth, it's very difficult to define data without speaking about the functionality, but I would suggest that every reference in the GEDCOM data specification to functionality represents a bit of a failure. And I've failed in a similar manner many times...