Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BrianP03103
I am utilizing and quoting Mr Harrington's work.Perhaps he would consider your request favorably. 
It would be entirely improper for me to edit his work, except for spelling errors. As a result, some of the word spellings and phraseology are distinctly British. I don't intend to change a thing.  |
Thought about this some more....It's ok by me if the database quotes Harry Harrington's info
as long as I can enter my own take on things for each species plus add ones not in that 'base set'. A separate text box entry for use by the end-user is ok, thus satisfying Brian's need not to change Mr. Harrington's text. The 'base set' does have a lot of good info - it's just too generic to meet the needs for ndividual collections around the world.
My details are going to be different from Pat's and both of us different from someone in the Philippines, etc. - climate/regional care variation on top of which tree species we keep. No one's 'base set database' is going to satisfy everyone. Since Brian has permission to use Harry Harrington's info (by quote), that's a good default start. But - We must have the ability to add our own species/genus entries in order to customize the database we populate with our collection data to plug the inevitable 'holes' where the generic set is not detailed enough or lacks some species we are interested in.
Do you have to define how big the text boxes are? Or is this dynamic? I'll add just a few 'customizing' comments on some (e.g., early spring=early March so I can schedule things on calendar, etc.). Longer comments on others (Attila's detailed birch pruning info....). And real long when I create an entry for a species that doesn't exist in the base set (something like copy Brian's whole example in this thread, then edit to fit my new species' entry). I
loath running out of characters....
In case there was ever confusion on this - I never expected Brian (or anyone else) to fill in all the species (or other) info for me. I was planning to fill out those tables myself, specific to my collection, my region, and my care practices (and add new ones as I needed them). Obviously, a lot of that info is common from user to user (Trident maple care doesn't vary all that much). So, having a 'default base set' is a time saver. Just don't let the 'default' squeeze out the utility of the package.
And I still want to be able to sort by species and cultivar/variety....