pcplantdb

[Richard Morris <webmaster@pfaf.org>]

Chad Knepp wrote:

> Ok, I think I have a proposal.
>
> One of the big difficult questions for me re: relationships has been
> how do we refer to elements that do not exist in the database yet, but
> that we hope to have at some point.  My answer: we don't.  How about
> at this point we only allow relationships between elements that exist;
> in our case, plants.  This will limit the effectiveness, but it is
> doable and could support GBI display.
>
> A rough table implementation:
>
> Object   |   Relationship   |   Object   |   Notes
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Plant A      Wind break         Plant B      Withstands extreme oceanic...
> Plant B      Trap crop          Plant A      Rabbits love Plant B
> Plant C      Inhibits growth    Plant B      Secretes allelopathic hormone
>
>
> A GBI display for Plant B would show a positive relationship path to
> Plant A and a negative path tho Plant C.
>
> I still don't really grok the relationship part of the equation, but I
> think if we allow an 'open vocabulary' it might sort itself out.  I'm
> also proposing that relationships be unowned and unmoderated (for
> now).
>
> Whadyathink?
Yep looks good to me.

Rich