[Taxacom] globalnames?

dipteryx at freeler.nl dipteryx at freeler.nl
Fri Sep 18 05:04:52 CDT 2009

Van: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu namens bti at dsmz.de
Verzonden: vr 18-9-2009 9:39
> Please forgive me for making the obvious comment from my side. 
> "We" here does not apply to prokaryotes (with the exception 
> of cyanophytes/cyanobacteria) and viruses.

> 1) much of the relevant literature is available as pdf files, 
> or in the case of viruses via a database
> 2) misspelling can be checked easily against our authoritative 
> lists
> 3) done

> Credit should be given where credit is due.

> Brian
> PS my comments are based on the use of the term "globalnames"  
> and "all existing taxon names" in this thread.

Yes, this is what keeps coming up: the tendency of some people
to make ever more sweeping statements and design ever bigger
unified databases, as if that will solve everything, on the one 
hand, as opposed to the reality with multiple kinds of 'names' 
(each kind regulated in a different way; each with a different
approach to registering or recording 'names', in wildly differing 
states of completion), on the other hand.  


More information about the Taxacom mailing list