[Taxacom] ICZN procedure question

Paul Kirk p.kirk at cabi.org
Thu Nov 11 18:21:49 CST 2010

answer to question (i): physical objects can only exist in one place ... and for journals/books that means rich institutions in the 'north' (generalization!) - electronic objects [in an open archive, free to the end user] are universal ... so bridging the 'north south divide'
answer to question (ii): see question (i)
written from the 'south' but I live in the 'north'


From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu on behalf of Stephen Thorpe
Sent: Thu 11/11/2010 23:02
To: fwelter at gwdg.de; Doug Yanega; TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] ICZN procedure question

the clarifications that I am seeking are (once again):

what are the advantages of e-only over the status quo?

who wants e-only and how will they benefit from it?

From: Francisco Welter-Schultes <fwelter at gwdg.de>
To: Doug Yanega <dyanega at ucr.edu>; TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU; Stephen Thorpe
<stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
Sent: Fri, 12 November, 2010 11:49:39 AM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] ICZN procedure question

Sorry Doug, you are right, I referred to the earlier issue, where
there were six comments.

The principal concern of most critical voices has less been the peer
review problem and the quality of publications, but the long-term
sustainability of electronic information. In medecine they don't
need to read the original information in 250 years, that's the
difference to us.

In BHL we are working hard in trying to develop systems to make
electronic files more sustainable, but it is less a technical but
rather a sociopolitical problem. Who is going to pay for
maintaining electronic libraries? However, the first step is to
develop such a library, that's what we are currently doing. Only
then we can get realistic ideas of the costs for maintaining it, and
then maybe the public gets convinced of how useful it would be to pay
for all that continuously, for several such libraries in several
countries. That would be great.

I also have a problem with most (or at least 50 % of the)
Commissioners not communicating to an extent which in a democratic
environment would be regarded as usual for persons whose job is to
pass laws. The Commissioners cannot "hide" themselves behind
political parties who would take care for the communication.
Since there is certainly no "consensus" in the community (this term
was used in the initial proposal in 2008), as can be seen in the
published comments, it is an exciting situation and there is always
the question, what will happen if the Commission takes a decision
disregarding this situation in the community. I would certainly opt
for taking some measures afterwards, but I do not really like to
think about that at the current moment.


University of Goettingen, Germany


Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:

(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org <http://taxacom.markmail.org/> 

Or (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here

The information contained in this e-mail and any files transmitted with it is confidential and is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient please note that any distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is prohibited. 

Whilst CAB International trading as CABI takes steps to prevent the transmission of viruses via e-mail, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail or attachment is free from computer viruses and you are strongly advised to undertake your own anti-virus precautions.

If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by e-mail at cabi at cabi.org or by telephone on +44 (0)1491 829199 and then delete the e-mail and any copies of it.

CABI is an International Organization recognised by the UK Government under Statutory Instrument 1982 No. 1071.


More information about the Taxacom mailing list