I tested the search "siberian iris" looking for Iris (Iris 'Swank') Siberian Iris (Iris 'Swank')

As the only Common Name is Iris, and Classification notes Siberian, I assume this is why Swank, and likely many others don't show up. Is that right Dave?

Common searches might be "siberian iris", "japanese iris",... Even "bearded iris" or "beardless iris" could be helpful search parameters. Even though the advanced search function in beta can deal with this, shouldn't a basic search deal with this as well?

How should this be corrected?

Great, thanks. I had not even noticed that. I'm sure Dave can fix.

The text search is searching through the names (Cultivars, commons, and latins). The only common name for this plant is "Iris" and the word "siberian" is nowhere is any of the names.

The way to get this resolved is to add "Siberian Iris" as a common name. Then it will show up in searches. But that begs the question: is "Siberian Iris" a suitable secondary common name for this?

Yes.

I can write a script to put "Siberian Iris" as a common name for all plants that have "Classification: Siberian" checked off. That won't get done immediately, but early this week.

Wonderful. Thank you!

Thank you, Evan for noticing this.

I have to say Dave that I love scripts and that you can resolve this in one fell swoop. Phew.
Can you do the same for Classification: Japanese (Ensata) for a "japanese iris" search?

Capitalize Japanese please, even in a search. That's something AIS determined a long time ago. Japanese is always capitalized.

I don't understand scripts, but I think I love them, too.

Thanks so much Dave, for everything you're doing for us.

Okay, I'll do it for Japanese as well as Siberians. Any others?

Can I have a bit to think? I can't think of any off hand. Certainly not any there would be a lot of.

How about all the different iris classifications, like Tall Bearded, Standard Dwarf, etc. etc. Right now there is one person that is just proposing those as a secondary common name one at a time.

Been thinking some more. What if:

A predefined search of an iris "classification" name brought up a message redirecting to the advanced search function.

ex. a search for "tall bearded" or "Tall Bearded" resulted in a message like "Please use our advanced search here (hyperlink)."

I have some hesitations about doing those kinds of things. I'd rather use the fields we have in order to make this as simple as possible. The experience will be better for everyone.

Calif_Sue said:Right now there is one person that is just proposing those as a secondary common name one at a time.

This is the kind of thing that scripts are made for. Nobody should have to do something like this one at a time if it can be done all at once by me.

It can be as easy as we have the rose one set up right now, you just click on the criteria as found in the database entries, like for roses, if you only want to search hybrid teas, that is what you check off
http://garden.org/plants/group...

So the same thing can be done for iris, a simple check for the class you want to limit your search to.

see, what Dave said.

Intuitive and simple is always best.

Your talking about the "advanced" Rose search aren't you Sue? My comment was about the "standard search". The advanced search already does this. Check Siberian or Tall Bearded and voila!

1. If a script could fill in "Siberian Iris" as a secondary common name for all entries that have -Classification: Siberian- that's great. Sounds like you could do the same for all of the Iris classifications. Some have several entries under Classification, usually the -Interspecies Hybrids---Species X-

2. Can a script also add "Siberian Iris" as a secondary common name for all entries that have sibirica as species? That will take care of most of the siberians. Can a script then delete sibirica from the species field for all of these? I can then recreate -Iris sibirica- which is a single entry.

Yes, that is all possible, Evan.

eclayne said:Intuitive and simple is always best.

1. ...Sounds like you could do the same for all of the Iris classifications...

Thanks Dave.
I should have written "...Sounds like you could do the same for MOST of the Iris classifications...

I don't think it's appropriate for the species crosses. Polly needs to weigh in on all this.

How about a script to add the -species "ensata"- to entries with -Classification: Japanese (Ensata)-.

I agree with everything. And there are very few species crosses. Let's handle those individually?