REF.Searchable Checklists--Limitations

From: HIPSource@aol.com

John said:

<<  But I really agree about the searchable database. What kind of things
would
 you search for? (that defines to some extent how the database would be
organized) >>

And Patrick said:

<<The beauty of the database is that, once you have all the  elements
incorporated, you can ask any question that occur to you.  Lists by color, by
date, by hybridizer, by a particular parent, and by combinations of these, all
become quickly possible.  The number of items of  information about any
particular hybrid are very limited and organization of the database is simple.
The data entry and editing would be very  tedious and require dedication and
attention to detail.  But in the hands  of someone who knows how to frame the
queries, the answers to many
 questions become fairly simple. 

Clearly the most obvious sort criteria are present in the Checklists: Name,
Hybridizer, Classification, Height, Bloom time, pedigree--which involves Names
in combination--- Awards, etc. And these would answer many simple questions.  

The color aspect, however, may prove a problem, since various color
classification systems have been used over the years, the changes reflecting
the perceived limitations of each system in its turn. More recent things often
have rhapsodic formal descriptions which are not keyed to any classification
system. But there are salients which might be useful: beard color is usually
noted in simpler terms, for instance.

Since the objective when writing the formal registration description has
tended toward distinguishing the individual iris rather than subsuming it into
an a priori category, identifying additional key terms to serve as common
denomenators, and thus search terms, may prove to be a problem.

It is often useful to loosely group for descriptive purposes with classic and
simple terms--self, amoena, variegata, plicata, etc...but in the cases where
any terms were not clearly stated in the Checklist descriptions they would
have to be added if the idea was to produce a search result which was
comprehensive. 

If the project involves returning to Checklist descriptions to edit them for
searchability on any element, especially color descriptions, it will be the
next millenium before anyone sees any electronic search resource and the
additional subjective content of it will rise, probably in direct proportion
to the volume of editing. 

I think that any searchable database would have to consist of the formal
Checklists as written and use of it would have to be with the caveat that any
sort designed to extract a list of irises fitting a given set of descriptive
criteria would not necessarily produce a comprehensive list. The seacher might
well have to hone his/her sense of categories and approach any question from
several angles. It is unlikely the computer will do much interpreting of
nuances.

Future registrations, on the other hand, could be required to incorporate
additional standard key terms, possibly even in numerical code, which would
offer the possibility of ever more precise searches on the updated AIS
databases of the future.

Anner Whitehead
HIPSource@aol.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help support ONElist, while generating interest in your product or
service. ONElist has a variety of advertising packages. Visit
http://www.onelist.com/advert.html for more information.
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index