Permaculture Information Web

[Heide Hermary <heide.hermary AT gaiacollege.ca>]

Sorry, I am not totally clear about this technical stuff, especially 
with respectto  who can enter / change what.  Whatever the system, we 
want to make sure that many people can contribute information under each 
topic, since we are collecting information that is not currently 
available in such concentrated form. Plant information is also commonly 
climate / locality dependent
Heide


Richard Morris wrote:

> Chad Knepp wrote:
>
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > I have a new topic for discussion which is the data model (and its
> > security implications) for piw.  Most of this I've discussed at
> > various times in smaller portions but here it is all together.
> >
> > The basic points:
> >
> >   o All data in the dataset is owned by a user/author.
> >     o Users/authors can add/edit/delete objects.
> >     The "PFAF/Ken Fern" elements will not be
> >     editable unless some designated representative of PFAF desires to
> >     do so. 
>
>
> > I'm inclined to discourage write access to the PFAF/Ken Fern account
>
> >     (see security implications).
>
> I'd agree here.
>
> I would allow a duplication and then edit.
> I.e. someone wants to change the pfaf text. To do that they create
> an copy of the pfaf text and add it as their own object. They can then
> edit the text at will. If the edits are good then the info
> will eventually be modded up until it better than pfaf data.
>
> >   o Writeable objects will be open to peer review/moderation which
> >     will affect display priority.
>
>
> >   o The core part of the plant object will be its botanical name.
> >     This allows attachment of multiple descriptions, synonyms...
> >
> >   o The elements of the current plant report that are titled Cultural
> >     Notes, Propagation Notes, Known Hazards, Edible Uses, Medicinal
> >     Uses, and Other Uses will become comments by PFAF attached to the
> >     plant object (with a high score)
> >
> >   o Registered user/authors (only) have the ability to moderate.
> >
> > Security implications:
> >
> >   o Being a decentralized data model, an account compromise can at
> >     worst cause a data loss of the contents of the data of that
> >     specific user/author, and possibly spurious moderation.
> Hopefully a backup system can be included at some point so we never 
> loose data.
>
> >   o Security is less critical with this model which means less than
> >     best practice authentication methods are more acceptable such
> >     as clear text transmission of authentication data.
> >
> > Anyway, think about it and let me know what y'all think.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Chad
> Great stuff. We really need to get this into whever our formal specs
> etc. goes.
>
> This model seems to have a stronger idea of ownership than say
> wikipedia, where the information is really a common, owned by no
> one. When people contribute to wikipedia the do so knowing that the 
> data can and will be changed.
>
> This has advantages that we can aproach authors who are
> understandable cautions about their IP and may be more likely to 
> contribute.
>
> It may also make it easier for new people to contribute.
> I know from my experience of editing wikipedia is that
> its taken six months until I've felt confident enough to edit
> a page, it is quite a big responsibility to edit this data.
> However adding a comment is something a new user would feel
> easier about, less responsibility.
>
> The disadvantage is that we'll end up with
> more fragmented data. There won't be the (current) definitive version of
> the dataset for a particular plant. Instead there will be
> a loose collection of datachunks.
>
> It does, I suspect, solve the locilisation problem.
>
> General feeling is its a bit complicated, but it could well work
> and it would be very interesting to see what happens.
>
> Go for it.
>
> Rich
>
> p.s. Seen a great movie of how a wikipedia page changes with time.
> Its one of the best things I've seen for understanding how this whole
> open content stuff can work and very convincing. Have a look at
> Heavy Metal Umlaut the movie
> http://weblog.infoworld.com/udell/gems/umlaut.html
> its well worth the download time.
>
> _______________________________________________
> piw mailing list
> piw AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/piw