If I may return to the discussion of breeders, technicians and nursery owners...As I have said before, I am fully in favour of trying to uncover the internal workings of rose breeding companies and crediting those within a company for their work, guided or not by the owners. The attribution of this variety to Salmaso (which I do not contest, though we only have his word for it) highlights a problem, though. It is this: anyone looking up the Sgaravatti output on your site will neither find Ricordo di Leone Sgaravatti nor Sant'Antonio di Padova. Unless the researcher already knows something about Salmaso (whose claim only came to light with the publication of David Celetti's book less than a year ago), he or she would be left with the impression that that output was limited to eight roses. To make it easier for researchers while acknowledging the creative capacity of in-house breeders, it will be necessary to have a kind of double-accounting system, whereby looking up Sgaravatti you find Salmaso's roses with due acknowledgement and a note directing you to him as a breeder. Then under his own name you would list him and his creations (which, in theory, might be for more than one company).