Ravenna

Hi Brian,

just wondered: do you want to give the option to enter pictures of soil or why did you link soil components with photos? Also it is not clear to me: what did you link with acquisition sources. In a way I thought that the hierarchy in access should actually be sorted differently. Though obvioulsy for us as users the specimen is the main interest it doesn't correspond to the access hierachy.

That would be acquisition source linked to soil, fertilizers, containers and specimens. Now on the access overview you intially showed you you might get a better overview if you place the soil, fertilizer, watering, light tables etc in the middle and one side "what should be" i.e. the links to the species table and on the other side the links the "is table" of your specimen tables. Just mentioning that as I tried to look at your access tables but there were so many lines crossing that I couldn't really make out what is happening there and I am not really sure with this table either.

I am sure that unlike me there must some real computer buffs on here and may be they might be prepared to have a look at that and discuss it with you. I just wonder whether you should give them more time for it. I really don't have any experience building data-bases but I just get a sense sometimes that you rush ahead before the step beforehand is clearly thought through. Because of the nature of how communication is done here and the time that people can spend on this this may take longer than it would if you did it in a professional setting. But may be that is just me. As I said I have never built a database so please don't take offense. I think it is great what you are trying to do here.