Permaculture Information Web

[Sean Maley <semaley AT yahoo.com>]

So a Guild is a community of Species which
collectively offer a Harvest.

Picking through Chad's code (crispy clean and well
organized), I can see that he is working out Synonyms
and Phrases for the current PIW search.  He also has
some tricks to catch spelling errors.  This results in
a large result set.  How is the PIW plant search
working for you now?  Are you looking for ways to
refine the search?  Or are you just looking for an
input page to add comments, guild participation
details, and usages?  Would you want details coming
from your school to be given any priority for your own
search results?  What information is missing that you
need?


-Sean.

--- heide.hermary AT gaiacollege.ca wrote:

> 
> > I'm hearing Species (not just plants) have
> > Relationships depending upon the Context of a
> given
> > Bio-region, Micro-climate, and Time of year.  Is
> this
> > correct?  Could we say that a Guild is a
> collection of
> > Species having a collective net regenerative
> (positive
> > feedback) Relationship?
> 
> That's what we would call an ecosystem in some
> circles, a guild in others.
> 
> A guild is a community of
> > species offering a harvest?
> 
> I would say that is the human-centered way of
> looking at it, but obviously very
> useful and perfectly valid. It must be understood,
> though, that plants /
> ecosystems / guilds / all relationships in nature
> don't exist to humour us, but
> to meet the needs of the participants. Traditionally
> we then come a long and
> exploit. Permaculture differs from other
> agricultural systems in that it tries
> to establish permanent functioning relationships in
> nature, even though they
> may be "artificial".  Look at the concept of
> permaculture design itself, which
> encompasses much more than just the plants growing
> on the farm....
> 
> So yes, a guild would be a community of species
> offering a harvest, but not all
> species would be necessarily present a harvest for
> us, although that would be
> the ideal artifial ecosystem. Don't know if nature
> works that way, but I think
> in time the database will help us understand the
> relationships a lot
> better,allowing us to make better use of them
> without the traditional
> destruction that goes along with exploitation of
> natural systems.
> 
> >
> > This might seem overly simplistic, but this is the
> > starting point for developing the pattern language
> > which becomes our tool.  Once we have the players,
> > then we can talk about what each knows about
> > themselves and identify their role within the meta
> > community.  If it helps, don't look at this as an
> > exercise to develop a repository of knowledge, but
> as
> > an exercise to develop a way to use it.
> 
> Yes, that's why I suggested to start with the search
> function, and worry about
> how to label the information later.  I can go to
> Google and search several
> trillion (?) websites and zero in quite quickly on
> the information I want.
> That is all plain text entry, presented in all kinds
> of different format.
> 
> That's the kind of thing I'm dreaming of, although
> the search can be more guided
> for something like this.
> 
> At this time , I think, google still looks for exact
> word matches.  Surely
> search technology exists or is is within reach that
> is more intuitive, looking
> for synonyms, word groups / phrases etc??
> 
> Cheers, Heide
> >
> >
> > -Sean.
> >
> > --- Stephanie Gerson <sgerson AT stanfordalumni.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Amen.
> > >
> > > Thank you Heide, for your insightful and
> provocative
> > > posts!  (I suggest we all
> > > re-read her words at the bottom of this email.) 
> A
> > > few things:
> > >
> > > -I agree that it would be an overwhelming task
> to
> > > develop an entirely new (and
> > > more function-oriented) taxonomy.  However, in
> the
> > > process of developing this
> > > (dynamic) database, we may observe such a
> taxonomy
> > > emerge (and co-evolve)
> > > organically…
> > >
> > > -How can we define relationships as +/-,
> > > synergistic/antagonistic – when
> > > this seems to change with level of
> magnification?  A
> > > relationship appears
> > > antagonistic when observing one particular
> organism,
> > > and appears synergistic
> > > when observing the ecological context (Heide’s
> > > butterfly example as a case
> > > in point).  Will we therefore have different
> levels
> > > of 'zoom' – allowing
> > > users to zoom into (organism-scale) or out of
> > > (ecosystem-scale) ecological
> > > relationships?
> > >
> > > -I’d like to reiterate Heide’s words,
> “I've
> > > thought about this a lot and
> > > finally decided not to worry about categories,
> but
> > > to describe the
> > > relationships.  Too much is lost by trying to
> fit
> > > organisms and dynamic
> > > relationships into tight little boxes.  That's
> not
> > > how life works.  And that's
> > > why we don't have much easily accessible
> information
> > > on exactly these things.
> > > Which is the reason for developing this database
> in
> > > the first place.  So let's
> > > not condemn it to superficiality right from the
> > > start.�  Yes, exactly.  This
> > > database will inspire users to think
> *systemically*
> > > - in terms of ecological
> > > relationships versus discrete (no such thing)
> > > components.  As I mention in
> > > grant proposals, PIW is a manifestation of the
> > > paradigm shift from
> > > reductionism to holism, which will be reflected
> in
> > > its structure.
> > >
> > > -However, as Rich and Sean point out, computers
> Love
> > > categories and discrete
> > > components.  I wonder, is this the way computers
> are
> > > intrinsically, or is this
> > > the way we’ve trained them to be?  Would it be
> > > possible to develop a
> > > computer language/database structure conducive
> to a
> > > more analog/continuous way
> > > of organizing information?  Would it be possible
> to
> > > develop computers that
> > > Love webs and relationships instead?
> > >
> > > -And thanks Matthew, for your suggestion.   Yes,
> we
> > > have discussed
> > > testimonials and rating systems.  But, I do
> prefer
> > > your description of it as a
> > > “mass repository for folk wisdomâ€? better.
> > >
> > > Thanks again to everyone for such stimulating
> > > discussion.
> > >
> > > peace
> > > *Stephanie
> > >
> > > p.s.  Others might be interested in checking out
> > > Heide's database - Heide,
> > > would you be willing to show it to others on
> this
> > > list?
> > >
> > > ------ Original Message ------
> > > Received: 07:21 AM PST, 02/11/2005
> > > From: Heide Hermary
> <heide.hermary AT gaiacollege.ca>
> > > To: Permaculture Information Web
> > > <piw AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [piw] Q2: what criteria do we want
> to
> > > record for plants.
> > === message truncated ===
> >
> 
=== message truncated ===



                
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less. 
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250