Mark(and other cone-heads);
        This is not a scriptus in the usual sense, sinse this variety nearly
always has some traces of textile lines, and banding of some sort in the
pattern.  66-27 has neither.  I feel this is a "good " form/variety
which deserves a name of some kind.
        Re cone classification, this will most probably be answered in detail
by a few people on the list, but just in case the "L" is still asleep
today, i will just say yes, Mark, there are cone classifications- people
such as DaMotta have written books on the subject.  However, for the
average collector, the several proposed taxonomic edifaces are not
terribly relevant, since they do not seem to last very long before being
replaced by some other scheme.  Until the dust settles, it seems safest
to stick to the tried-and-true Conus, so as to avoid re-organizing one's
collection every couple of years.  The same applies to Cypraeidae, so
far as i can see, although i have less knowlege in this family.
                                                                                                -Ross of the Great White North.