pcplantdb

[Richard Morris <webmaster@pfaf.org>]

Chad Knepp wrote:

> Interesting discussion about the wikipedia article.  One way that I
> can see to handle the data with a direct affect on the security model
> and difficulty of implementation (both favorable) is to implement it
> in a way so that all data is "user-owned" and is editable solely by
> the owning user.  From a security standpoint damage from account
> compromises are limited to the account itself.  Can't remember who
> said this but it all clicked for me when someone suggested the idea of
> having individual user versions of plant data that can be
> scored/arranged by peer review/locale.  This is a lot less messy than
> allowing collaborative editing with histories, etc. of a single set of
> data.  
Now that IS interesting.

> One difference from wikipedia, for example, is that we wouldn't have a
> single "authoritative" version of something, but would instead have
> many versions that would be rated and displayed based on peer review.
> I'm not sure if this would be a downside or an advantage.
Almost like the book review you get on Amazon.

> Another difference that may be an actual disadvantage (although I
> can't think of specific reasons) is that from a technical standpoint
> the data would not actually be edited collaboratively, but would
> instead be consist of multiple versions (or edits) of the same data. 

Not necessarily a problem. I'd say go for it, a bit of playing around 
might be good right now.

Rich