In an ideal world there would be one database (at least per country) - and
for the non technical I mean a system that stores information about
locations, users, surveys, species and sightings. It would have a well
defined "interface" so that anyone could write a "user interface" - the
means by which people enter data into the system and retrieve information.
Some might want a maps-based interface, some a text based one and some might
choose to upload data from their own private databases. It would be possible
in this ideal world to use one interface to enter data (because you find it
the easiest one to use) and someone else's interface to retrieve data
because they had the best reporting mechanism.
It is good that Birdstack proposes to interface to other databases so that
data can be copied to (e.g.) Birdata. Would be even better to see the three
main parties in Aus get together and work towards a shared interface!
I agree that if a user enters data into database A and it gets copied
SOMETIMES to database B my concept would have problems - would be OK if it
was always copied as I could allow for that.
<>
>
>
>
> So this would be the opposite to Dave Torr's idea of a site that
> integrates data from several databases. This one could act as a front
> end for several others, feeding data into them. I guess that would make
> safeguarding people's data easy - we could forward it on to several
> other databases.
>
> But I wonder what the implications would be for Dave's idea. The
> integrated data could be full of duplicate sightings!
>
> Peter Shute
> www.birding-aus.org
> birding-aus.blogspot.com
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to:
>
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
|
