pcplantdb

[John Schinnerer <john@eco-living.net>]

Aloha,

> How do those bits of code (each possibly a microcosm of other bits of code
> as with plant taxonomical data) communicate with other bits of code...

Well, in terms of program code, that gets into nitty-gritty 
implementation details, and is going to be more Chad's table than mine.

In somewhat plain English, a user "asks" them, and/or they "ask" each 
other.  The "asking" by a user would be done via one of our eventual 
various user interfaces, from a simple web form for queries to the 
graph-based browsing interface option and so on.

If I "ask" the database as a whole something like "who here is a shade 
loving nitrogen fixing woody shrub that grows OK in swampy ground," some 
objects will essentially reply "I am!"  Their reply would include, or 
offer links to, further information about themselves - like what their 
names, climate preferences and so on are.

The "asking" by each other would be a consequence of a user query 
propagating through the object model - if I "ask" a particular plant 
entity something like "what are good companion plants for you," that may 
trigger code in the plant object that may go look at ("ask") other plant 
objects.  For example if it is shade-loving it may "look around" at 
other plant objects to find ones that provide heavy shade (and have 
compatible root zone, climate and precip and soil needs, etc.).

> > We are already a culture addicted to abstraction; I think plant 
> > objects in an OO database are less an abstraction than relational 
> > database tables full of bits of data about plants.
>
> Can you explain this a little further?

For examples of our abstraction addiction, I submit phrases such as 
"collateral damage" and "friendly fire," and news commentators referring 
not to their fellow human beings but only to "consumers" or "voters" or 
"protesters" or "terrorists" or "patriots" and so on.
Our money is an abstraction; most of our food is far abstracted from its 
source; most of our "education" is abstractions removed from actual 
experience; etc. etc.  Our whole culture is very "head" (intellectual 
abstraction) oriented.

If our model of plants and their interrelations is as much as possible 
like our observations of how plants as living systems do whatever they 
do, IMO it is less abstract and thus more life-giving, life-enhancing.
The model itself might even teach some users more about plant 
interactions themselves, besides just providing "info about plants."

I suspect it will also be easier to build and use, though of course I 
have no proof until we bake a pudding and see what happens.


--

John Schinnerer - MA, Whole Systems Design
------------------------------------------
- Eco-Living -
Whole Systems Design Services
People - Place - Learning - Integration
john@eco-living.net
http://eco-living.net