Viewing post #2124933 by goedric

megdavis said:
In my scientific field, there are many unknowns. The fun bit is that there are "known unknowns" (where you have some information or know when you don't have information, both states apply to this discussion) and "unknown unknowns" (true unknowns, when you don't know that you don't know, and this does not apply here). The trick is how to share the "known unknown" information in a consistent way so everyone has equal access to what is known and what is not known. We actually have guidelines for how to do this for my scientific field (you literally have to follow them or you can't publish, which is the science project equivalent of registration).

Is there a push for more guidance related to registration of parentage? What are pros and cons to changes in guidance or standardization?

I have had this very discussion on more than one daylily group page on FB. To me any info is beneficial... I think just having specific entries for either of the known grand parents would be a first step. Also allowing SDLG as a suffix in the parent and grand parent fields would be useful... that way we would have tons more info in an economy of space.

As an alternative... an open ended field with "breeders notes" would be helpful

AND as an incentive.. they could charge more for Unknown x Unknown registrtions... that would discourage sloppiness, laziness and secretiveness...