pcplantdb

[Richard Morris <webmaster@pfaf.org>]

John Schinnerer wrote:
> Aloha,
>
> RichM:
>>The simplest form is
>>
>>object  | links_to
>>-------------------
>>plant A | Plant A Guild
>>plant A | Plant B Guild
>>plant B | Plant B Guild
>>
> > Backing up a bit... do we really have to manually define every
> > possible guild PIW is to represent??
>
> ....
>
> > I thought the idea was to develop a system that allowed people
> > to explore possible guilds. i.e. pull up several plants/objects
> > and compare their needs/benefits to see if they would be compatible.
>
>
> Thanks for pointing this out Richard...
> I also thought the idea was to create a system which could
> extract/extrapolate guilds based on data stored about plants, with maybe a
> few explicit examples of 'canned' guilds.

Yes a very good point.

I'm thinking from a technical pov, in if we are to have a concept like a 
guild (really a list of related plants), how could we represent this on 
a computer.

To my mind the simplest way is to have the guild as a seperate
object, linking to each plant. Other way to represent it get a bit 
complicated. It does not necessarily mean that the guild object is 
explicitly created. It would be technically posible to
have links like

plant A | Guild C
plant B | Guild C

but not actually create Guild C. If a user did click a link
a page just listing the plants linking to that guild could be 
automatically created.

> And yes, another good reason to have at least a plain English document
> that describes what it is we're actually trying to do here...

I supose thats whats happening. Trying to work out what were trying to do!

ttfn :-)

Rich