Re: Recursive Arrays 101

LOL - I don't think there are any natural keys here. Traditional scientific
names are amazingly flaky. I guess I shouldn't call them flaky; it's just
that no one has ever figured out a way do deal with all the complexities of
classification. The new LSID's might be more stable - but which LSID does
one choose? But it's amazing how many "aliases" are attached to many
taxonomic names; utterly bewildering.

On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com>
wrote:

> On 10/25/2015 09:10 PM, David Blomstrom wrote:
>
>> It's also interesting that some entities (e.g. EOL) are now using
>> something called Life Science ID's (or something like that) in lieu of
>> traditional scientific names. It sounds like a cool idea, but some of
>> the LSID's seem awfully big and complex to me. I haven't figured out
>> exactly what the codes mean.
>>
>
> Aah, the natural key vs surrogate key conversation rears its head.
>
>
>
>> Then again, when I navigate to the Encyclopedia of Life's aardvark page
>> @ http://www.eol.org/pages/327830/overview the code is actually
>> amazingly short.
>>
>>
>
> --
> Adrian Klaver
> adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com
>

--
David Blomstrom
Writer & Web Designer (Mac, M$ & Linux)
www.geobop.org