I accept I have made a subjective judgement "that it has done a reasonable job". I copied my FH 7 Gedcom (5.5.1) and imported that file into the Genealogist online TreeView, with the results I quoted earlier. I made no changes to the Gedcom before importing.tatewise wrote: ↑31 May 2023 22:47 I think you need to analyse the TreeView data more closely to make objective judgements.
Perhaps export a GEDCOM file and review that in detail or import it to FH and check the File Statistics.
My guess is you uploaded the FH V7 GEDCOM in 5.5.1 format and TreeView expects 5.5 format.
I suspect the Facts discrepancy is due TreeView not recognising Custom Attributes that use the FACT tag.
I would expect the non-standard Place, Research Note and Source Template records to be discarded.
There seem to be a lot of Citations missing perhaps because of missing Custom Attributes.
Where do all those 13251 Notes come from?
This is the kind of analysis I would undertake when adding a custom GEDCOM Destination to my plugin.
The notes are from local notes. I do have custom attributes, they have not been imported (but see note re UDFs below)
I have now exported the TreeView to a Gedcom and imported that into FH7 as a new project. The Gedcom states it is V5.5
There are two log files: Exception report - Excluded branch lines, Excluded link to non-existent Place record
Validation report with 5 entries saying individual has no link to family as [spouse/child]
There are 81 UDFs = all relate to family records where I have some custom attributes.
File statistics for the new FH 7 project are: