pcplantdb

[Richard Morris <webmaster@pfaf.org>]

Chad Knepp wrote:
> Just checked and there are 270 books already listed in the dataset.
> There are currently no references to anything other than a book.
I've aculuminated lots of references to other web databases which also 
contain details of the different plants.

> This raises another interesting point, being what is the 'reference'
> for the 30 - 40 little bits of data we have like height, preferred
> moisture level, etc.  Currently they are the product of the research
> and experience of Ken Fern, but how do we indicate that and how do we
> indicate a change of one element of the thirty plus elements.  
> Some
> things are missing and some things are, in my experience/locale,
> wrong, so changes need to be made.  How do we track
> accountability/reputation in this?

Yep, I've though about a more fine grained comments situation. Consider 
the data for a particular plant as consisting of a number of "Sections", 
such as Physical Characteristics, Edible Uses, Medicinal Uses, ...

It could be posible to attach a comment to each section. So if you had a 
new bit of info about a plant's edible uses the comment could appear in 
the Edible uses section.

This sort of system, might actually encourage more focussed comments 
rather than general rants about the plant. It does make the interface a 
bit more complicated though.

I've done something like this
on the experimantal system I put together at
        http://www.ibiblio.org/pfaf/pcplantdb/index.php

Rich