pcplantdb

[Chad Knepp <pyg@galatea.org>]

Stephanie Gerson writes:
 > hello everyone, 
 >
 > Please (oh please) read and respond to the following: 
 >
 > 1. Wonderful news that we are at Ibiblio now – Chad and
 > JohnH, do we all need logins?

Not really unless you are doing static web content or cvs commits.
Databases access will require an Eden login to do authoring/editing of
PIW information and as soon as I implement the concept of users (my
very next task after a bit of web work).

 > 2. Lawrence suggested that we get in touch with the International
 > Seed Saving Institute.  Which brings up the question all over
 > again: are we ready to publicly announce ourselves?  Now that we
 > have a URL, are decided on our platform, and are hosted on Ibiblio?
 > Or would we rather wait until we’ve spruced up the
 > website, and have something to show?  Even if it’s a
 > list of PC-characteristics to include, and not a working demo?
 > I’m fine with waiting, but also think that feedback from
 > a ‘press release’ would be valuable in a
 > grant proposal.  What do you all think?
 >
 > 3. Chad wrote, “Also, I still have some energy to do
 > some logo/graphic design stuff, but I need some
 > ideas/feedback.” Yes!  Everyone, please take a look at
 > permaculture.info, and think about logo/graphic elements
 > – I will do so tonight and tomorrow.

 > 4. Potentially worthwhile projects: 
 >
 > a. a non-technical summary how information will be organized in
 > database – Chad, since you understand it the best, would
 > you be willing to do the first?  Or, write a simple draft of the
 > first, and I can edit it?

Ok, but I don't think that it's clearly understood how the data will
be organzied in the database.  My current line of thinking is that it
will be best to take the existing dataset and make [scripted] changes
to the schema incrementally.  The discussion we've had on schema so
far gives me a lot of good material for creating desirable changes.
Still somewhat unknown is how to implement the concept of
'relationships' in an RDBMS cleanly and elegantly.  That said I think
I can create some documentation on the existing database and plans for
the future.

 > b. a list of PC-characteristics users will be able to search by
 > – Chad, can you please send out the list you are working
 > with so far?  And we can add to it, and post it on the website?

See separate post with subject Vocabulary.

 > 5. None of the ‘techies’ responded to this
 > – would it be possible to sort results by multiple
 > characteristics (i.e. medicinal value, nitrogen- fixation, and
 > attraction of predatory insects)?  And display these results
 > 3-dimensionally, so users could visually see how plants fare
 > according to multiple characteristics?

It would be easy to do this sort of sort but I don't think displaying
that information in a meaninful way is difficult.  Displaying the
results in a table format is also easy.  The difficulty of displaying
the information 3-dimensionally depends on how it's done.  I don't
currently know of any simple ways to do it.  It is also dependent on
what you mean by 3d?  Somethings may be very easy to do...

 > 6. An idea I had today while visiting a beautiful farm in Santa
 > Cruz, California.  Not that this is necessarily something PIW could
 > take on, at least not in the immediate future, but might be a
 > possibility.  Crop rotation schemes can be very complicated.  Where
 > to plant what when, so that you are alternating plant families in
 > each bed throughout the season, but giving rotation preference to
 > more disease-prone families, not placing overhead-watering plants
 > next to drip plants, etc.  Apprentices at the USCS program have to
 > overlay farms maps from the previous 2 years over each other to
 > determine what ought to go where.  So of course I got to thinking
 > about hg.  And about the possibility of a program into which you
 > could enter information – crops that must be grown,
 > which families they pertain to, how many beds you have,
 > etc. – and have it help you plan a crop rotation
 > schedule.  I agree that this might not be the best program to
 > write, considering that it replaces human thought/skill with
 > automation, which will never account for all the variables anyway.

I have a similar lack of enthusiasm for this idea as a tool as I did
to the Guild Builder concept in that I think it over specializes to an
extent that makes it a poor impedance match with the tool (computers
and their programmers).  I am in favor of a more generalist approach
and personally think the best way to figure out a crop rotation or a
guild is with an observant human mind that is in touch with the best
info available (hopefully PIW).  At the moment I just can't imagine a
computer system I would trust to really generate a guild or crop
rotation.  

I can embrace the concept of relationships because making connections
between information is an important concept, even if I don't currently
have a real clear idea of implement it.  If oberservation has
determined following one annual with another is a beneficial
relationship this could be recorded as such and the interconnection
between the two plants could/should be displayed on both plants.

On interesting thought I had was having search method that selected
plants/elements that had the most interconnections with itself.  To
the extent and accuracy of the relationship data this could build a
[simplistic] guild focused around a single plant.  Regardless of the
specific usefulness, the number of relationship interconnections
between elements should be one of the valuable products of the PIW
dataset as it develops.

 > However, we recently got a letter from the Whole Systems
 > Foundation, replying to our proposal, saying that we need to
 > demonstrate PIW’s applicability to larger-scale
 > agriculture.  Assuming that large-scale Permaculture is even
 > possible and desirable (I know we’ve discussed this, but
 > let’s assume for now), the tool described above would
 > certainly be applicable to large-scale farming.  What do you think?

I disagree with their analysis.  I think PIW currently is a VERY
helpful tool with information that is directly applicable to large
scale agriculture.  For example, you could use it now to look up new
plants that might work in your crop rotation...  I also think the
possibility of having the most and best [relevant to agriculture]
botanical information on the planet has something to contribute to
large scale agriculture.

 > p.s. Chad, are you still stuck? 

Yes, more on this in separate email.

 > ∑ Chad  
 > 1. keep coding… 

Get coding you mean...

 > 2. write a rough non-technical summary of how information will be  
 > organized, submit to Stephanie 

Not currently a high priority but on it... waiting till things resolve
a little may be beneficial at this point.

 > 3. write a list of PC-characteristics that users will be able to search  
 > and sort by, submit to list for feedback 

Separate email: Vocabulary

-- 
Chad Knepp
Perl - $Just @when->$you ${thought} s/yn/tax/ &couldn\'t %get $worse;