I am in favor of implementing the Code and not waiting for the companion volume. I know that the editors are against this, but there is a lot of sentiment out there that the volume is long overdue (*pace* the editors, and I understand their position) and some even think the whole project is dead. -- kp > The companion volume seems to make this impossible, of course (hence > item 6 of the Preamble and Art. 7.1). But how about we > > 1) make a list of the names that are to be defined in the companion > volume, > 2) write an Article that says any names on this list as well as > homonyms, homodefinitional synonyms and likely heterodefinitional > synonyms must not be published before the companion volume (we could > even temporarily exclude entire clades from the scope of the Code just > to make sure), > 3) write another Article that says everything in the Companion Volume > has precedence over everything else (which we should do anyway, see > below), > 4) and then launch the mother*ucking Code already -- if not immediately > after we're done discussing the current round of amendments, then on > January 1st, 2013? > > Is RegNum up to that task? > > What else have I overlooked? > > ==================== > > ...In any case, I just noticed, Art. 7.1 needs to be reworded, because > it declares the companion volume unpublished by definition: > "Establishment of a name can only occur after the publication date of > Phylonyms: a Companion to the PhyloCode, the starting date for this > code." The companion volume can't be published after its own publication > date! > > How about: > > "Establishment of a name can only occur on or after the publication date > of Phylonyms: a Companion to the PhyloCode, the starting date for this > code. Names and definitions in Phylonyms that have not been suppressed > by the Committee on Phylogenetic Nomenclature (Art. 15) have precedence > over all others." > > The second sentence would still apply if my suggestion above should be > accepted. An insertion "(see Art. 7.1)" in Art. 12.2 would also be a > good idea in any case. > > Compare how the ICZN establishes its order of precedence of 1) Svenska > Spindlar/Aranei Svecici (a consistently binominal book on Swedish > spiders from 1757), 2) Systema Naturae 10th edition (1758), 3) > everything else (1758 or later): > > "Article 3. Starting point. The date 1 January 1758 is arbitrarily fixed > in this Code as the date of the starting point of zoological nomenclature. > 3.1. Works and names published in 1758. Two works are deemed to have > been published on 1 January 1758: > - Linnaeus's Systema Naturae, 10th Edition; > - Clerck's Aranei Svecici. > Names in the latter have precedence over names in the former, but names > in any other work published in 1758 are deemed to have been published > after the 10th Edition of Systema Naturae. > 3.2. Names, acts and information published before 1758. No name or > nomenclatural act published before 1 January 1758 enters zoological > nomenclature, but information (such as descriptions or illustrations) > published before that date may be used. (See Article 8.7.1 for the > status of names, acts and information in works published after 1757 > which have been suppressed for nomenclatural purposes by the Commission)." >
> CPN mailing list > CPN at listserv.ohio.edu > http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn > -- Kevin Padian Department of Integrative Biology & Museum of Paleontology University of California, Berkeley CA 94720-3140 510-642-7434 http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/people/padian/home.php
(740) 593–9381 | Building 21, The Ridges
Ohio University | Athens OH 45701 | 740.593.1000 ADA Compliance | © 2018 Ohio University . All rights reserved.