Thread subject: :: Diptera DataBase

Posted by jorgemotalmeida on 12-06-2007 14:21

Tony T wrote:
Nikita Vikhrev wrote:
2. I mean base of pure facts conserning distribution and biology of Diptera. The fact itself may contain attached image(s) as confirmation or illustration or not contain, generaly it doesn?t much matter.

I think the database should include at least one "good" image of the species and perhaps other photos showing the diagnostic characters of the species. It could also show a photo of the habitat when this is specialized.

The Gallery could be a lot better. I am not suggesting that all images go in there, only those that are correctly identified. As an example, there are 2 great images on Hybomitra bimaculata by Black http://www.dipter...ad_id=6620. These are under the title Tabanus. They are not in the Gallery and will not be in there because, presumably, Black has not submitted them to Paul for inclusion. It would be nice if a sub-editor could simply move these images to the Gallery. Thus the potential for the Gallery is high but this potential is not being fully utilized.
Of course, if you include 1 or more "good images" in your database then the Gallery will eventually be obsolete. At the moment it contains very little useful information about a species; hardly anyone adds a comment to a Gallery image but there are often several useful comments on non-Gallery images:p

And what about put in each photo in gallery... the link for the thread where the specimen was discussed? If all photos had this, we could see more details and save space!
It is consensual that is important to have sure about ID for gallery, of course. This is a strong point for gallery!