Trees, Shrubs and Conifers: Plant Names, 1 by Stake

Stake wrote:
After a lot of thinking I've come to the conclusion that we need two recognised naming systems. One for plant lovers/gardeners that rarely changes and one for Botanists that can take into account new scientific findings.
The plant lover/gardener name needs to be based on botanical names but distinct differences in the form of a plant in the wild will require a different name. By this I mean where a botanists' species can have within it a tree form, shrub form, procumbent form and prostrate form, the new naming system would require that they be different species (although it might be decided that this system won't use the word species). If there are variations that occur across a genus then those variations if selected out will be noted by a CV name. By this I mean things like flower colour or variations in leave shape or colour. To a degree this is already done with plants like roses, where the identifying feature is the CV name, like Peace, the gardener doesn't have to be told that the plant he/she is looking at is Rosa X Hybrid Tea it is a Rose CV Peace. Some might like to know it is a Hybrid Tea but the few who want to know more of the parentage can then start looking at the Botanists' classification.
Does anyone think that this system could be set up by using the knowledge of some of the worlds best gardeners who can if they think it neccessary consult with Botanists but Botanists will not be allowed to dominate the group.
The photo is Eucalyptus ficifolia any one can see it is a Eucalypt but it's not now it's a Corybia but after about 10 years it might not be it might be changed back to Eucalyptus. Bah & Double Bah.
Regards Brian