[CPN] Ratification of the PhyloCode

• Previous message: [CPN] Ratification of the PhyloCode
• Next message: [CPN] Ratification of the PhyloCode
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Dear CPN members,

  During my reading the code, I came with the following minor notes:

  Art. 6.2. There is a "]" before the "6.2".

  Art. 9.6.  Is " common" necessary in the end of the fourth line? Isn't it
redundant with "share".

  Art. 9.7.1 (last line). Why "species and organisms" does not apear after
"specifiers" as in similar statements in Arts. 9.5.2 and 9.6.1?

  Art. 9.9 (and elsewhere): crown-clade is sometimes written without an
hyphen. Also for total-clade in other parts of the text.

  Art. 11.13 (second paragraph). Why "relative to other crown clades" is
used in the two last examples of definitions (lines 8 and 9) but not in the
first (line 4)?

  Art 9.9.3 (line 4): perhaps include "still" before "apply".

  Art. 9.11 (Example 1, line 5): "was" after "name"

  Art. 10.5.3 (line 4): I believe "This treatment applies" to the
specifier, not to the "crown clade".

  Example 2 (page 34): In order to fit with the abbreviation (final lines),
shouldn't "homologous" in lines 7 and 10 be replaced by "synapomorphic".

  Art. 14.5 (line 3): plural to "panclade".

  Note 15.11.3. Perhaps "must"  is better than "may" in line 2.

  Note 21A.3 (Example 1). "combinationwith" in line 3.

 Note sure if (other than the typos) there is place for those modifs, but I
wanted to point them out anyhow.

  Regardless of the above, I am ready to vote.

  All the best,

  max



Em qui, 17 de jan de 2019 às 14:05, Cantino, Philip < cantino at ohio.edu 
>
escreveu:

> Dear CPN members, 
>  
> Today is the target date I suggested to start a vote to ratify the code. 
> I initially sent it to you on Dec. 17, and I sent a revised version on 
> January 8 that differed only in the addition of the Preface and revisions 
> of Art. 11.9 and Appendix A.  There was a delay of a couple of days in that 
> second email because the file was too large.  Hopefully, though, you all 
> received it by January 11.  Dick Olmstead sent me a couple of small changes 
> in the Preface, but other than that, I haven’t heard from any of you. 
>  
> How do you want to proceed?  Do you feel ready to vote now or do you want 
> more time to read it?  Bear in mind that you or previous CPN memberships 
> approved everything that is in the code other than the current versions of 
> the Preface and Appendix A.  However, within reason, I would like the vote 
> to wait until everyone who wants to read the code carefully has time to do 
> so. 
>  
> If you do NOT want me to call for a vote soon (let’s say next Monday), 
> please respond to this message and suggest a date that would be realistic 
> for you.  *I will interpret a lack of response to mean agreement that I 
> can call for a vote on Monday*. 
>  
> Best regards, 
> Phil 
>  
>  
> Philip D. Cantino 
> Department of Environmental and Plant Biology 
> Ohio University 
> Athens, OH 45701-2979 
>  
> Phone: (740) 593-1128 
> Fax: (740) 593-1130 
> email: cantino at ohio.edu 
< cantino at ohio.edu 
> 
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
-- 
Max Cardoso Langer Ph.D. (Bristol, UK)
Departamento de Biologia
Faculdade de Filosofia, Ciencias e Letras de Ribeirao Preto
Universidade de Sao Paulo (USP)
Av. Bandeirantes  3900
14040-901     Ribeirao Preto,  SP,  BRAZIL

Phone: +55 16 3315 3844
FAX: +55 16 3315 4886 http://sites.ffclrp.usp.br/paleo/ 
*A semântica é o último refúgio dos canalhas.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: < http://listserv.ohio.edu/pipermail/cpn/attachments/20190121/042e1bf3/attachment.html 
>

• Previous message: [CPN] Ratification of the PhyloCode
• Next message: [CPN] Ratification of the PhyloCode
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]