Re: SPEC-X [1 Attachment]
- Subject: Re: SPEC-X [1 Attachment]
- From: &* P* &* <r*@embarqmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 16:13:39 -0500 (EST)
|
Since I am the last living authority on the subject I have prepared the attached document as a statement for history. The AIS may change things in the future but the definition that was approved by my committee should stand and I believe is a fair and workable definition. I has been criticized by people from all sides for 25 years, much like all the other AIS classes and awards but I think it has stood the test of time and no one has shown something better.
From: "Kenneth Walker" <kenww@astound.net> To: iris-species@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 10:56:08 AM Subject: Re: [iris-species] SPEC-X
As I recall, those who worked to create the category (I don't remember exactly who now) intended it to be a broad category for hybrid iris that did not fit well into other categories. This includes those that might be placed in another category but did not meet modern expectations despite being judged worthy of introduction by the hybridizer.
Ken On 1/9/2014 8:18 PM, Sean Zera wrote:
|
Attachment:
What is a species.docx
Description:
- Follow-Ups:
- SV: SPEC-X
- From: L* H* &*
- SV: SPEC-X
- References:
- Re: SPEC-X
- From: K* W* &*
- Re: SPEC-X
- Prev by Date: SIGNA Seed Exchange
- Next by Date: Re: SPEC-X
- Previous by thread: Re: SPEC-X
- Next by thread: SV: SPEC-X