# Why is genealogical data portability so bad? **URL:** \ **Category:** Help\ **Created:** [February 27, 2026, 1:44pm UTC](https://gramps.discourse.group/t/why-is-genealogical-data-portability-so-bad/9174 "2026-02-27T13:44:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 6
**Author:** ![StoltHD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/db5fbb/32.png) [@StoltHD](https://gramps.discourse.group/u/StoltHD)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2026, 5:32pm UTC](https://gramps.discourse.group/t/why-is-genealogical-data-portability-so-bad/9174/6 "2026-02-27T17:32:09Z")
The only reason **GEDCOM** remains the sole standard is that there isn’t enough collective pressure to demand better. When users advocate for modern **Open Source** and **Open Data** frameworks—specifically those that support true semantic interoperability—the response is predictably stagnant. This resistance isn’t limited to commercial giants like **Legacy** or **RootsMagic** , who simply ignore the conversation. Even within the **Gramps** developer community, there is a frustrating reluctance to adopt truly interchangeable formats. While **Gramps** has an excellent native **XML** structure, it remains a functional silo. Instead of embracing recognized standards used by major global institutions, the typical response from developers is ‘fork it and do it yourself.’ To move genealogy into the modern era, we must demand support for established data exchange formats and ontologies, such as: - **CIDOC CRM (ISO 21127):** The backbone of **[OpenAtlas](https://openatlas.eu/)** and the British Museum, providing a robust framework for historical events and complex prosopographical relationships. - **[Schema.org](http://Schema.org):** Utilizing **JSON-LD** (Linked Data) and **Microdata** to make genealogical profiles machine-readable and discoverable. - **IIIF (International Image Interoperability Framework):** Using **JSON** -based manifests to share high-resolution primary sources and archival documents seamlessly. - **GraphML:** An **XML** -based format designed specifically for complex graph structures, far superior to the flat-file limitations of GEDCOM. - **CSL (Citation Style Language):** The industry standard for managing sources and bibliographies in **JSON** or **XML**. True data portability requires support for standard serialization and modeling types like **OWL** (Web Ontology Language) and **RDF** (Resource Description Framework) for deep semantic modeling, as well as **JSON-ND** (Newline Delimited JSON) and **CSV** for high-volume data processing and accessibility. The result of ignoring these standards is a fragmented industry where data integrity is sacrificed for the status quo. I have advocated for these **Open Data** formats multiple times, but both commercial vendors and open-source maintainers seem unwilling to bridge the gap between niche genealogy tools and the professional world of digital humanities. **Note:** _This content has been translated from Norwegian and edited for improved flow, clarity, and technical accuracy to better reflect the specific standards and formats discussed by Google AI._ * * * **Side note:** For those using **Markdown** tools like **Obsidian** , I highly recommend checking out this plugin: [Genealogy research in Obsidian for those who want to try](https://gramps.discourse.group/t/genealogy-research-in-obsidian-for-those-who-want-to-try/8926) . --- _[View the full topic](https://gramps.discourse.group/t/why-is-genealogical-data-portability-so-bad/9174)._