[Taxacom] LSID versus names

Chris Thompson xelaalex at cox.net
Mon Jun 18 19:32:34 CDT 2012

Sorry, NEAL,

MY point was that the old ICZN could have been modified so names, not 
numbers, could be UNIQUE identifiers.

But instead of modifying the Code, we are being forced to accept LSID which 
are largely alphanumeric strings impossible to remember.

And that addressed Rod's question about tradition, etc.

As for your exampe of "two names of the same spelling published by an author 
..." as you should be aware under the ICZN only one of them can be VALID, 
hence, the proposal that I made would still ensure that each and every VALID 
scientific name in Zoology would be uniquely identifiable, etc.

Oh, well ...

Thanks for thinking about naming something after me, but be sure Rich gets 
the right LSID!



-----Original Message----- 
From: Neal Evenhuis
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2012 6:11 PM
To: Chris Thompson ; Roderic Page ; Frederick W. Schueler
Cc: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Does the species name have to change when it 

Chris tends to exaggerate here when making a point. The LSID for that 
species (which he misspelled) [the species is exiguaspina] is:


... but he wanted to make it look silly by also adding the LSID for each 
author, which is absolutely unnecessary but a nice trick to do when making a 
point. The LSID for the species name INCLUDES the authors so as to 
disambiguate that name from any other one with that spelling published in 
that genus on that date by those authors on that page. Without an LSID, two 
names with the same spelling published by an author or authors in the same 
work would look like X-us a-us Smith, 1850 but we could not know that there 
were TWO different species with that same name in that work. Entering the 
computer age and using LSIDs allows us to disambiguate those names.

Moreover, to criticize unique identifiers such is this is disingenuous since 
we all live in a world with unique numbers identifying us - and few 
complain. Globally, we are known by our passport number, so this is really 
the same as an LSID for humans (as Chris knows, some have two passports but 
that is a different story!). Those without passport numbers are essentially 
the same as species that have not been registered with ZooBank. Those people 
are known to a small group of people (either by taxpayer ID, driver's 
license number, a bank account number, etc.) but not necessarily everyone in 
the world can know that person uniquely separated from everyone else. As 
soon as everyone on the planet gets a globally unique identifying number can 
we really be known to everyone and not be confused with someone else. The 
same with species. Once every species has an LSID can we be assured we can 
separate it from everything else and especially those with the same name.

Gotta get back to my ms. I'm naming something after Chris...


On 6/18/12 11:28 AM, "Chris Thompson" 
<xelaalex at cox.net<mailto:xelaalex at cox.net>> scribbled the following tidbit:

B26AB2A6-972F-4A18-9D1D-486A980CF80F E9541A64-EC44-4856-B2AB-B4E8400358F8 &
1FDB5781-C8A0-4088-8D18-DCD5BB01C548 for our unique name! [or in the old
fashion system, Rhopalopsole exigupspira Du & Qian]

This message is only intended for the addressee named above. Its contents 
may be privileged or otherwise protected. Any unauthorized use, disclosure 
or copying of this message or its contents is prohibited. If you have 
received this message by mistake, please notify us immediately by reply mail 
or by collect telephone call. Any personal opinions expressed in this 
message do not necessarily represent the views of the Bishop Museum. 

More information about the Taxacom mailing list