jacques.melot at ISHOLF.IS
Tue Aug 24 13:22:29 CDT 2004
Le 24-08-2004, à 6:09 -0700, nous recevions de Paul Kirk :
>Jacques, your logic (qualitative) is without fault but quantitatively a
>publication which only exists in two coutries IS effectively hidden from the
>world if it's existence is not proactively advertised. Unfortunately Article
>29 has no proactive element - it is written in the sense of "I have
>published something but I do not need to tell everyone who might need this
Pour mieux se faire une idée de la difficulté : quelle est la
référence exacte de ce fameux "hidden work". Cette référence ne peut
être secrète. Merci par avance de nous la communiquer.
>From: Jacques Melot [mailto:jacques.melot at isholf.is]
>Sent: 24 August 2004 12:34
>To: Paul Kirk; TAXACOM at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU
>Subject: Re: TurboTaxonomy?
> Le 23-08-2004, à 22:48 -0700, nous recevions de Paul Kirk :
>>OK Jim, so you think registration is inherently evil, but how is your
>>comprehensive indexing to be achieved when there is no requirement in the
>>Codes that producers of names should advise the indexers that they have
>>produced names? Only recently a series of nomenclatural novelties published
>>after thorough taxonomic research were subsequently found to be in error
>>because an obscure effective publication from a couple of decades earlier
>>had remained effectively hidden from the world. Neither the producer of
>>publication and the names therein, nor at least one (prominent, in this
>>case) taxonomist who obtained a copy of the publication, considered it
>>relevant to inform the appropriate indexing centre of it's existence. This
>>is all as a result of the taxonomic impediment you correctly identify in
>>taxonomist themselves - it's what some taxonomist do, period. Perhaps there
>>is a promised land somewhere in the future (GBIF?) and there the 'rightous'
>>will prosper, but in the interim chaos reigns.
> « Quand on veut noyer sont chien, on l'accuse de la rage. »
> Tout ceci (ce type de difficulté) n'est pas nouveau et fait partie
>des difficultés qui apparaissent de temps en temps dans les meilleurs
> De plus... et même avant tout, si la publication est valide, c'est
>qu'elle est effective (art. 32.1 a). Si elle est effective (art.
>29-30), c'est donc que :
>... this obscure publication was effected "by distribution of printed
>matter (through sale, exchange, or gift) TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC OR AT
>LEAST TO BOTANICAL INSTITUTIONS WITH LIBRARIES ACCESSIBLE TO
>BOTANISTS GENERALLY. [...]".
> Cette "obscure publication" étant effective n'était donc pas
>"hidden from the world".
> Yours sincerely,
> Jacques Melot
>>Paul M. Kirk
>>From: Jim Croft
>>To: TAXACOM at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU
>>Sent: 24/08/04 01:09
>>Subject: Re: [TAXACOM] TurboTaxonomy?
>>> The "taxonomic impediment" will be alleviated when taxononmists are
>>> to do taxonomy and are adequately compensated for it. All else is
>>> rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
>>If you get more taxonomists and pay them more, all you will end up with
>>more of the same... which depending on you point of view might be a
>>thing... or a bad thing...
>>In my opinion we will always have a taxonomic impediment as long there
>>taxonomists doing what taxonomists have always done...
>>Without a change in mind set and a concerted commitment by taxonomists
>>work together on or towards a single focussed global project, taxonomy
>>taxonomists will continue to be their own impediments... it is just part
>>of the human condition of many people working in multiple teams with
>>But I must confess to being optimistic about it all. The large
>>collaborative projects coming out of and arising from GBIF, etc. are all
>>(Just to clarify Rich, I still regard registration as inherently evil -
>>comprehensive indexing on the other hand is good and righteous... :)
More information about the Taxacom