That's the way I've always understood it, yeah.

My understanding of the terms is that incomplete dominance occurs when both alleles are partially expressed, and so you get a kind of "blended" expression of each -- like the pink snapdragons -- while co-dominant alleles are both expressed equally.

I think of pastels when I think of incomplete dominant. If you figure a "pure" pastel (homozygous pastel, AKA "super") is a bright yellow snake with lots of blushing and shades of purple, and a pure normal ball python (homozygous wild-type) is a black and brown snake, the heterozygous pastel is kind of a mix between the two.

The best example I know of true co-dominant is in human blood typing. Heterozygous AO, and homozygous AA, are the same -- blood type A (with only the A antigen expressed). Same for heterozygous BO and BB -- only the B is expressed. Heterozygous AB, on the other hand, is blood type AB -- both are expressed.

I don't know of any examples of (what we suspect would be) true co-dominance in python morphs ... Anybody?

The other thing that baffles me is what's going on with the BEL complex stuff ... The heterozygous form of a mojave, for example, does not in any way seem to be a "blend" of the homozygous mojave and the homozygous wild-type. Maybe it's my lack of understanding, or maybe it's just that we oversimplify Mendelian genetics a bit too much ...

But yeah, as BAMreptiles says, "codom" is generally the accepted slang term -- it's a bit easier to say/type than "incomplete dominant"