>Actually Jim, I’m inclined to say that this is one of those situations where >we will simply have to agree to disagree. Dear Jim and All, I thought I'd just ignore this, but will make a response, probably against my better judgement. Jim, I do not agree to disagree at all, because mostly I am right and mostly you are wrong. Both names are in the same 'Designation Group' (as per ICNCP) as assigned by the ISHS to each ICRA. The second name should never have been approved. Cultivar names are rarely cited in detail and few would pronounce the names differently enough to dispel confusion. The name confusion comes up more often than you'd imagine, obviously. There is a very obvious problem, and it is a good example only of a bad registration practice. We are stuck with this and my trying to explain this to you obviously failed. I hope other readers see this in its correct light. Good luck. Jim W. >To begin with, when each name is properly cited there is minimal chance of >confusion. > >There is no way to prevent people from formatting the names incorrectly and >becoming confused > >Furthermore, careful speakers pronounce the words chameleon and chamaeleon >differently. > > For me, the clincher would be the high degree of improbability that these >two names would be found in the same discussion > >I don’t see a problem with maintaining both names. Indeed, it’s a good >training example for people learning the differences among the various sorts >of nomenclature we use. > >Jim McKenney -- Dr. James W. Waddick 8871 NW Brostrom Rd. Kansas City Missouri 64152-2711 USA Ph. 816-746-1949 Zone 5 Record low -23F Summer 100F +