[Terrapreta] Charcoal Specification Development

[code suidae]

I updated the diagram with the suggestions below, it often makes more
sense if you can see it.

I'm trying not to go overboard on complexity, but I don't want to set
it up in such a way that it doesn't represent what people might use it
for. Generally I end up going overboard anyway :D

Dave K
(I pulverized about 3 pounds of char this weekend and obtained a big
pile of compost. All set to start setting up experiments!)
-- 
"Our ignorance is not so vast as our failure to use what we know." -
M. King Hubbert


On 10/2/07, code suidae <codesuidae at gmail.com> wrote:
> Here are some questions I have.
>
> CharcoalTrial only allows for one kind of feedstock Material right
> now, but I imagine someone is going to want to use blended feedstock.
> Should we allow multiple feedstock materials?
>
> I'm not sure how closely we should track crop yields from a
> CultivationTrial. Is it enough to simply note how much there was, or
> should we include provisions for more detailed nutritional and
> physical analysis? Is it enough to put this information in the
> experiment log where others can find it, or are enough people going to
> report enough comparable details that adding fields of them would be
> worthwhile?
>
> For simplicity I only linked one Plant to the CultivationTrial. This
> does not allow trials where multiple crops grow in the same test plot
> (for example, a plot containing the Three Sisters, corn, pole beans
> and squash). That could be problematic, but I wanted to see what ya'll
> thought. Should I have a Plant entity describing kinds of plants
> 'Corn', 'Beans', 'Squash' and then a Crop entity that can link to one
> or more Plants? Most crops would simply be one Plant and maybe a note
> about the variety, but a few could be multi-plant crops.
>
> If you used the soil left at the end of one CultivationTrial as the
> input to another, a significant amount of time might elapse between
> the two trials. During this time soil characteristics might change.
> Currently only one set of analysis data can be associated with a
> material and it is assumed to be unchanging over time. Should a
> Material have a list of analysis events so that we can note who did
> the analysis, when and where?