* Question on Extending GEDCOM Structure

[dbnut]

Hi, Experts!

I'm pretty certain the answer's going to be "no", but...

Is it "legal" for Calico to add a custom Structure (using standard primitives) to a record such as INDI?

[I realise Calico adds its own custom Record types with various structures]

[tatewise]

Yes, as long as it adheres to the GEDCOM rules for 'user-defined' custom tags, i.e. they start with an underscore (_).
FH already has lots of such extensions as listed in GEDCOM Extension List which does not include the FH V7 extensions _SDATE, _FSID, _NOTA, _RNOT, _SRCT, _PCIT, etc.
However, such extensions rarely export well to other products via GEDCOM.

[dbnut]

Yes, as long as it adheres to the GEDCOM rules for 'user-defined' custom tags, i.e. they start with an underscore (_).
FH already has lots of such extensions as listed in GEDCOM Extension List which does not include the FH V7 extensions _SDATE, _FSID, _NOTA, _RNOT, _SRCT, _PCIT, etc.
However, such extensions rarely export well to other products via GEDCOM.

Brilliant, very grateful, Mike.

Seems as if the _FLGS example is the sort of thing I'm looking for. Though a pity there's no explicit detail of the primitive types used.

Of course I wouldn't expect any to be exported - just binned, like custom records, by any intelligent destination (if such, other than FH, exist).

[Mark1834]

Many of the custom extensions are imported correctly when reading the original database, which is always preferable to GEDCOM where available. For example, RM stores all its data in an SQLite database that FH understands and imports. However, there is no “export to database” option in FH.

[dbnut]

Many of the custom extensions are imported correctly when reading the original database, which is always preferable to GEDCOM where available. For example, RM stores all its data in an SQLite database that FH understands and imports. However, there is no “export to database” option in FH.

Mmmm, how jolly interesting...
Not a lot of people know that!