>Ok. I do think that the book I had in mind is different than the monograph
>that Jan has mentioned. Is it different enough to warrant the effort?
OK, I do not think so. Have you seen the topics of the monograph framework
I have mentioned, already?
You want:
1. where they grow, 2. descriptions, 3. interesting tidbits, 4. common
and latin names, 5. identification keys 6. and our experiences in how to
grow them successfully (...) 7. Some technical descriptions 8. and
synonymy
We have (direct citation from framework, comments in "# #"):
#4.# scientific name 4.# vernacular name 5.# diagnosis #obsolete as soon
#as keys for all taxa are available in database# 8.# Synonyms #already
#included in database# 8.# Homonyms #already included in database# 2.#
#Description 2./5.# Variability #including keys to infraspecific taxa#
#1.# Geographical distribution 1.# Habitats 6.# Cultivation 6.# Hybrids
Please describe your "3. interesting tidbits" a bit more exactly. I am
rather sure I will find some equivalent even for this one in the framework.
>I want to keep the book useful and interesting to the hobbiest rather than a
>fully cited monograph.
And I think a monograph indeed can (and should) be both, fully cited and
useful/interesting.
>Such a book would be a useful read-me-first addition to the archives
>for new subscribers. I will post, shortly, a brief suggested chapter
>outline of what I have in mind.
Yes, and I bet my socks it can be done by monographs for the world wide web
page. Why do you still want to do your own thing?
The number of professional botanists involved in the monograph project so
far is close to zero (at least this number would increase considerably if I
could persuade YOU to participate). They are all cp enthusiasts who want to
help each other (and I do not want to exclude myself from these).
Kind regards
Jan