[pcplantdb] relationships again
Richard Morris
webmaster at pfaf.org
Wed Mar 30 12:34:16 EST 2005
Chad Knepp wrote:
> Ok, I think I have a proposal.
>
> One of the big difficult questions for me re: relationships has been
> how do we refer to elements that do not exist in the database yet, but
> that we hope to have at some point. My answer: we don't. How about
> at this point we only allow relationships between elements that exist;
> in our case, plants. This will limit the effectiveness, but it is
> doable and could support GBI display.
>
> A rough table implementation:
>
> Object | Relationship | Object | Notes
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Plant A Wind break Plant B Withstands extreme oceanic...
> Plant B Trap crop Plant A Rabbits love Plant B
> Plant C Inhibits growth Plant B Secretes allelopathic hormone
>
>
> A GBI display for Plant B would show a positive relationship path to
> Plant A and a negative path tho Plant C.
>
> I still don't really grok the relationship part of the equation, but I
> think if we allow an 'open vocabulary' it might sort itself out. I'm
> also proposing that relationships be unowned and unmoderated (for
> now).
>
> Whadyathink?
>
Yep looks good to me.
Rich
More information about the pcplantdb
mailing list