Irisregister and the Wiki

[John I Jones <jijones@usjoneses.com>]

I have been pondering an issue for some time and feel that it is time  
to bring it before the board to make sure that what is happening is  
what the board wants,

The issue is what irisregister information should be allowed in the  
Wiki.

The Wiki is moving forward and entries are being made as you read  
this. I has become apparent that people entering the irises into the  
Wiki in addition to what ever description and pictures they  
personally add, are also copying the full text entry for that iris  
from the irisregister into the Wiki entry.

If this is what the Board wants then so be it, but I think that we  
should consider the impact of such action.

The irisregister has been a significant source of revenue for AIS  
since its inception garnering over $16000.00 since 2003— almost  
$2300.00 per year. The effect of putting the irisregister information  
in the Wiki is to give the information away for free to anyone (since  
the Wiki will be open to anyone at no cost).

There are also lots of people that have paid for 3, 5, and 10 year  
subscriptions to irisregister who will now see that we are giving  
that information away for free.

It is true that irisregister will still have some advantages over the  
wiki.
- the search engine has greater flexibility and control than the Wiki
- Irisregister gets updated with new and corrected information  
particularly on older irises
- Irisregister has the reserved names included in its database

People use irisregister primarily for:
- Getting descriptions of irises for sales or their own database(s) -  
Wiki will provide the same

Other (but far less) uses for irisregister:
- doing research on parentage - Wiki probably won't be able to do  
this as well
- doing name searches for new introductions - Wiki won't do this as  
well because it will lack the reserved names

The irisregister information can be kept out of the Wiki because  
every entry to the Wiki must be reviewed by the "docents" for  
propriety and they can easily recognize an irisregister entry. The  
Wiki has some 4000 entries already, but that should not be a major  
effort to correct. I am sure that not all of the entries have  
irisregister excerpts in them.

The Wiki's real claim to fame is that it has pictures (up to 20 per  
iris) and I applaud its value in that regard. I am, in fact, against  
having pictures as part of the official AIS registration primarily  
because of the inconsistency of photographic and display technologies  
and vagaries, and in that regard Wiki provides a valuable resource.  
The full registration descriptions are of limited additional value in  
the Wiki unless people want to copy them out for their own purposes.

The Wiki will also have some advantages because the newest  
introductions can be placed in the Wiki whereas there is a delay in  
placing the newest R&I information in irisregister.

I think the Board needs to proactively decide what, if any,  
irisregister information should be allowed in the Wiki. I think we  
need to consider the monetary impact on the AIS through loss of use  
of the irisregister. No I don't know the magnitude of that impact,  
but I can tell you that the majority of irisregister use is to get  
descriptions.

John

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to the AIS Secretary
<aissecretary@irises.org>
The archives for AISDiscuss are at:
http://www.aisboard.org/lists/aisdiscuss/