[Taxacom] Terminology of trinomials

Paul van Rijckevorsel dipteryx at freeler.nl
Tue Jan 1 12:00:42 CST 2008


Indeed, the best wishes for 2008 to everybody!

===
From: "Andy Mabbett" <andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk>
> Are there websites, or other references, which compare and contrast the
> Codes' terminology?

***
There is a preliminary page explaining some of the differences at
http://www.bgbm.org/iapt/biocode/biotable.pdf, but presumably this is of no
use to you.
* * *

> How many Codes are there?

***
That depends on what exactly you would want to count as a Code.
The main ones are
* the ICZN, currently the 1999 edition at http://www.iczn.org/iczn/index.jsp
* the ICBN, currently the 2006, Vienna Code at
http://ibot.sav.sk/icbn/main.htm (I assume this has now been released for
general use, although it is not entirely error-free)
* the ICNB or BC, there being no single edition of the current rules (still
coming, hopefully), but with the 1990 edition at
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=icnb with an overview of the
changes up to and including the 2002 IUMS congress to be found here:
http://www.bacterio.cict.fr/code.html
* for viruses:
http://www.ictvonline.org/codeOfVirusClassification_2002.asp

[information on the ICNB and viruses derived from a post by Brian Tindall, a
few months ago]
* * *

>>There is a feeling "out there" that it would be nice to have a single
>>Code that would deal with all living organismes.

> Speaking as a taxonomy lay-person; that seems very sensible, if not
> overdue!

***
Well, I don't share the sentiment. Software is relatively easily to develop,
so it makes no sense to me to try and forcibly change reality so as to make
it easier to write software. I rather feel that software should be written
to make it easier for the users to deal with reality. An old argument, I
know, but still ...

Paul






More information about the Taxacom mailing list