Re: plant DB

["georg parlow" <georg@websuxxess.com>]

hi all who are interested in this DB thread:


from my point of view the following speaks FOR another plant db:

1. the pc orientation: pc designers might know of different propagation
strategies, uses (designers are aware of uses other people pay no attention
to, e.g. fire-retardancy, attracts predatory insects - good for orchard,
good trellis for xy,  good greenhouse-shade [late to set leafs and early to
drop them],  good mulch-tree [leaves rot easily], etc.), the
guild-information,  and the special info (accepts neglect, smothers grasses,
does well without pruning, needs annual average of xy (high ) to fruit well
but doesn't like heat, etc.)

2. the info is personal experience of the one who enters the data (in pfaf
db ken's entries are by far more valuable to me then anything else), those
who enter data can be reached via mail for specific details (of course the
background of the question has to be presented alomg with the quesstion, for
i myself have zero energy for answering academic or "interest" questions)

3. it is primarily a collection of observations, rather than conclusions -
to braoden our own observational base to make better conclusions ourselves.

> So perhaps invasiveness can be indicated by what conditions enable
> invasiveness rather than an exhaustive listing of locations and related
> behavior.
so while certainly such conclusions can be included, i would greatly
appreciate the underlying observations as well.

kind regards
georg