JOSEPH E. LAFERRIERE
josephl at AZTEC.ASU.EDU
Mon May 24 02:34:25 CDT 1999
> I completely disagree with you statement:
> Besides, one can easily solve that problem by including
> the date in the number. Give the plant the collection
> number "23059924" meaning it is the 24th specimen you
> collected on 23 May 1999. Totally unambiguous, unless you
> are in botany for over 100 years.
> This is about the worst possible use of collection numbers.
Please reread my posting yesterday in its entirety. I
was not suggesting this as an alternative to the usual
sequential numbering system. I was suggesting this as
an alternative to no numbers at all, in the case of
a collector too lazy to use a proper notebook. I use
a sequential numbering system myself.
> Sorry to say that this way is NOT totally
> unambiguous since different parts
> of the world tend to write the date differently.
This is irrelevant if we are talking about a single
collector. If that collector is consistent, yes,
the system is unambiguous.
May the Ficus be with you!
Dr. Joseph E. Laferriere
More information about the Taxacom