Re: Checklist Quandry

Ken;

	I appreciate your 2 cents. Sometimes I wonder whether
anyone uses the checklist to begin with. But I keep
trying to create the reference that I wish I had when
I first started with species. And someday this
incremental approach may get me there.

	I suppose I am stressed because Portland is such a
large convention and it seems like an opportunity to
show what we offer. This new edition will be almost
twice the size (about 400pages) of the last addition,
so adding the last two years R & I’s is only a tiny
fraction of the increase. Much change is in the
species section. Taxonomy has progressed in the ten
years since its last revision and many new taxa have
been named. Also names have changed. There have been
over 600 names added in that section alone. But many
still lack some descriptive details. A huge effort has
been putting the species entries in a consistant
format with the cultivar entries.

	I have always looked at the checklist as a throwaway
that one disposes of after the next edition, But now
it is becoming so massive and will probably cost
almost $20 to produce that I suspect people will want
it to be more permanent. I guess that is what concerns
me about the many holes yet in the data. But then
again by its very nature this will never be a finished
work.  If copies are made for the convention it will
probably be only 20-30. But I hate the thought of
having come this far without someone being able to use
the material. The again I hate the thought they will
be disappointed because a portion is incomplete.

Bob


--- Ken Walkup <krw25@cornell.edu> wrote:

> Bob,
>          Here's my 2 cents worth:  The people who
> need the most current 
> registration info can still find it in the R&I.  It
> doesn't seem crucial to 
> have it in the SIGNA checklist.
>          When I was preparing the beginner's guide
> which came out last 
> year, Will told me that he was able to have it
> printed in lots of 100.  If 
> that's true for this as well, maybe a small quantity
> of reprints of the 
> currently available checklist would do.  Or, if it's
> not too much extra 
> work, you could go with an interim version that
> includes the info you've 
> compiled to date.
>          SIGNA already has a strong group of
> publications available.  I 
> wouldn't stress out about what you haven't been able
> to do. We all have to 
> live in the real world.
>          Ken
> At 06:14 PM 4/20/2006, you wrote:
> >I am working diligently on upgrading the SIGNA
> Checklist. I would
> >like some advice from potential users. The
> Checklist is relatively
> >complete when it comes to AIS registered cultivars.
> But it has been
> >deficient in botanical names, KAVB registered
> names, in unregistered
> >names, and in descriptions of AIS names not
> included in the AIS
> >registries. I am not going to meet my deadline all
> for the added
> >information I believe can be obtained. For example
> I now have a
> >complete listing of KAVB (dutch Iris) registrations
> but I do not
> >have as yet their descriptions. Also I have several
> botanical names
> >that I have not been able to access the literature
> for their
> >descriptions. The dilemma is; do I put out a
> interim revision this
> >year or wait another year to try to bring all this
> together. The
> >information from two years ago has undergone a
> great deal of
> >improvement and the format of the whole document is
> much more user
> >friendly then ever before. Yet I despair because I
> can't get
> >everything done before convention. Since a
> checklist is added to
> >each year, should I be concerned about what I have
> yet to
> >accomplish, or should I just look at it as a work
> in progress that
> >will improve every year. Improvements include an
> extensive list of
> >references, a section listing biographies of
> hybridizers and authors
> >also listing the plants they have named, (this is
> still incomplete),
> >and discussion of various classifications of Iris.
> There is much
> >more planned for the future but since these
> additions are not
> >polished, the question is would a purchaser feel
> discouraged to
> >receive more than previously but much that
> apparently is yet to
> >come.  Since the inventory of old checklists is
> almost gone, should
> >I release something now or wait. No matter every
> year there will be
> >substantial improvements, so this is an ongoing
> question. In five
> >years I am sure the present list will be almost
> unrecognizable in
> >comparison.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
>     iris-species-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 



 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/iris-species/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    iris-species-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index