Subject: RFD: rec.plants.*

From: [email-masked] (Richard J. Sexton)
Date: 1 Nov 1994 17:52:38 -0500

Proposal for a newsgroups reorganization of plant specific newsgroups

Request for Discussion: rec.plants.*

by: Richard J. Sexton ([email-masked])
---------------------------------------------------

GROUPS AFFECTED:

rec.gardens
rec.gardens.roses
rec.gardens.orchids
rec.arts.bonsai
*.aquaria
bionet.plants

INTRODUCTION

Currently, the top level hierarchy for most things plant related on
usenet is rec.gardens.

This probably made sense back when rec.gardens was created, becuse in
that timeframe most newsgruops on usenet were computer related and
non computer groups took rather a back seat. Usenet has grown (sic)
however, and this is no longer the case. As such, lumping everything
plant related under rec.gardens does not make sense in many cases, 
especially when one considers possible future plant-related newsgroups.

JUSTIFICATION:  

Many newsgroups that could not have existed back when rec.gardens
was created (.orchids, .bonsai) are currently successful newgroups,
yet they are classified under rec.gardens. Although this is not
completely inappropriate, it does not scale well, since gardens
is a subset of plants, not vice versa. One scarcly has a "garden"
or orchids - one has a collection. One does not "garden" houseplants,
nor does one "garden" bonsai.

Future possible groups include ones for Bromeliads, Gesenerids and
carniverous plants, as all have successfull mailing lists, and it's
only a matter of time until they will be newsgroups. These are
not best classified under rec.gardens.

If we follow the International Committee on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN)
model for biological taxonomy, in spirit, but not in letter, then the
higher levels of newsgroups classification should be broad sweeping
classification. Rec.gardens is not, and following the idea set
by the rec.animals.* reorganization, I feel it is time to re-examine
the taxonomy of plant groups on usenet.

PROPOSED CLASSIFICATION:

I believe usenet would be well served by establishing a rec.plants
hierarchy, and below I outline both current and future groups and
how they would fit into this proposed hierarchy, (not that current
existing groups are denoted with an asterisk ("*"):

rec.plants							Hierarchy, not a group.
rec.plants.misc					Miscellaneous discussion, not fitting elsewhere
rec.plants.orchids*				(=rec.gardens.orchids) Orchids
rec.plants.bonsai*				(=rec.arts.bonsai) Little trees (and in my case, kindling)
rec.plants.indoors				Houseplants. Expected RSN
rec.plants.aquatic				? (Instead of the proposed rec.aquaria.freshwater.plants)
rec.plants.gardens*				(=rec.gardens)
rec.plants.rhododendrons		Also expected RSN
rec.plants.roses*					(=rec.gardens.roses)
rec.plants.gesenerids			From mailing list
rec.plants.bromeliads			From mailing list
rec.plants.carniverous			From mailing list

Note that rec.gardens may not fit well under this hierarchy, as issues of
composting and design of gardens are not plant related topics per se. Perhaps
consideration should be given to renaming rec.gardens to rec.gardening,
or rec.plants.gardening.

I have resisted the urge to classify the above groups, although tempting
as "indoor" or "outdoor", because that implies a geographical bias which
is best avioded, although in looking at the list above I admit I'm not
happy with the number of groups at the third hierarchical lavel. An
argument <i>for</i> this is the room it leaves for subgruops such
as:

rec.plants.orchids.dendrobiums
rec.plants.gesenerids.streptocarpus

and the like. In this context, it is not seen as "third level clutter".

Note that the above list of groups is not an RFD to create those groups,
for the time being, just a reclassification of existing groups is
suggested, although as a side effect of this, if interest is sufficient
to create some of the additional groups above, this would be a good time
to bring that up.

NOTE

This RFD is being issued in concordance with the guidelines set in the
"How to create a new usenet newsgroup" FAQ regularly posted to 
news.announce.newgroups. Please refer to this article if you have any 
questions about the newsgroup creation.

Unless the discussion indicated a need to resubmit a new RFD, the CFV will
be posted approximately three to four weeks after the posting of this RFD.

This RFD was (cross)-posted to the following groups:

rec.gardens, news.groups, rec.arts.bonsai, rec.gardens.roses,
rec.gardens.orchids, *.aquaria, bionet.plants

--                            __         ___        [email-masked]
Richard J. Sexton            /\ `\      /  /
Toronto, CANADA              \ `\ `\   /  / __   _
 _______                      `\ >  >/<  < /\_\ /\_\       [email-masked]
/\______\ Masonic order __  __  /  / \ `\ `\/_/_\/_/_