If I'm raising this in the wrong place, just say so and I'll find a better home.
In practice, I see common qualifiers to relationships and to the various events. I also see record comments. I believe these qualifiers and record comments are different from "notes" as either can pertain DIRECTLY to the specific data fields we are trying to communicate; each can color the understanding of that data field significantly. Conversely, these are the kind of items that if stripped, can materially alter the information being shared.
I'm interested in knowing if any of the models we are presenting allows these qualifiers or record comments to transfer (or if in the original database, will they be seen as exceptions and/or irregular entries by the model).
Borrowing from Hoff and Leclerc, _Genealogical Writing in the 21st Century_ (2006), p. 2, "The process of expressing our findings in writing--including proper use of terms such as probably, possibly, likely, and maybe--is the most valuable tool in our research kits. Unfortunately, it is also the most neglected."
Same source, p. 115, "Commonly used Symbols," for "?" as, "uncertain interpretation of original text."
Do any of the models presented allow me to communicate "probably" as in the record below (example from above noted source, p. 18:
... born about 1718, probably at at Marlborough, Massachusetts
How do I use a "?" to report that one of the persons I'm reporting as a child might not be a child.
In practice, I also see what I will call pertinent name/date/relation comments. Will any of the models above allow me, for example to communicate the dates as below (example from above source, pp. 18, 20):
Died between 2 July 1722 (date of will) and 3 September 1772 (probate of will) ...
Married before 1742 (when their fist child was baptized), perhaps at Norwich Connecticut, where her parents were living.
Is it wrong for my user brain to translate this (family/group) as the program methodology differences?
I mostly use TMG, and I don't think it natively runs what other programs call family record. Individuals are linked as parents to children using different tags (bio, step, adopted and other tags).
When we say GEDCOM 6.0 XML recognizes both, is that to say TMG's native data linking parents and children is still ported as a "family" but its other "group associations" come in as "group?"
Or, are we saying TMG's "parent"-"child" data comes in without any family envelope--just another group association?