[Taxacom] e-only publication for zoology, starts today

Stephen Thorpe stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Wed Sep 5 20:08:03 CDT 2012


 
>(more robust in that in order to make a change to content, a user must be authenticated – so we not only what changed and when, but we know reliably by whom)<
 
this touches on another point that I don't yet fully understand: it seems on the face of it now that ZooBank has unilateral control over who can or cannot publish e-only, by simply refusing registration access to anybody it doesn't like? I'm not sure yet just who can or cannot register publications on ZooBank, and whether there is overt or covert control over this?? So, say, if ol' Trevor Hawkeswood rolls on up wanting to register some e-only publications for Calodema, does he have the right to register them, or could he be turned away???


________________________________
From: Richard Pyle <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>
To: 'Stephen Thorpe' <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>; 'Laurent Raty' <l.raty at skynet.be>; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu 
Sent: Thursday, 6 September 2012 12:54 PM
Subject: RE: [Taxacom] e-only publication for zoology, starts today


Hi Stephen,
 
These are all good points, and ones that we thought a great deal about when designing ZooBank.  In fact, the ZooBank database has a more robust edit log/audit system than Wikimedia does (more robust in that in order to make a change to content, a user must be authenticated – so we not only what changed and when, but we know reliably by whom).  What you’re actually describing is the gap between what’s in the ZooBank database, and the subset of that content that is displayed on the web page. Obviously, there are many, many, many things that are in the database that are not yet displayed on the page.  Sometimes this is because it’s internal information of no use to the end user.  Sometimes it’s because of embargoed information (e.g., In-Press articles prospectively registered).  Sometimes it’s because people disagree about what should and should not be displayed on the website (and to whom) – so we need to get feedback from more users
 before making a decision.  And sometimes, it’s simply because there are finite resources for development of the website, so we need to prioritize what gets done first.
 
The point about displaying the date when the Archive was included in the ZooBank registry falls in the last of these reasons. It’s already on the “to do” list (along with many other suggestions that have come in since the site went public), and so this feature will be added soon.
 
I would like to strongly encourage everyone who has been using ZooBank (or who will be using ZooBank) to provide feedback and suggestions on how the site can be improved.  Our plan is to be as responsive as possible to suggestions, so that ZooBank can continue to improve steadily and at a reaqsonably fast pace. One request, though, would be to make sure the suggestions get directed to admin at zoobank.org.  Simply sending them to me personally, or to taxacom, will not ensure that the suggestions make it into the queue.
 
Aloha,
Rich
 
From:Stephen Thorpe [mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 10:25 AM
To: Laurent Raty; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Cc: Richard Pyle
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] e-only publication for zoology, starts today
 
This is a good point! One has to know that before 7.00 AM GMT, 4 Sep 2012, it was not possible to register a publication in compliance with the amendment, but this is not obvious from ZooBank records!
Also, an incorrectly registered publication *could be* corrected and backdated by ZooBank, as far as we know!
It would have been better (though still imperfect) to have a Wikimedia style edit history of records, so we could see who did what when ...
 
Stephen
 
From:Laurent Raty <l.raty at skynet.be>
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu 
Sent: Wednesday, 5 September 2012 11:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] e-only publication for zoology, starts today

On 09/04/2012 10:08 AM, Richard Pyle wrote:
> Technically that's not possible, because before one hour ago, it was not
> possible to comply with the requirements of the Amendment within ZooBank
> (i.e., the old ZooBank did not allow designation of an Archive).

It wouldn't be technically possible if the content of the entries in 
ZooBank was immutable. But this doesn't seem to be the case...

Eg:

http://zoobank.org/References/DB67F6F7-2BC1-4D26-8193-00C30487FBE9
http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.174.2299

Registered on 6 March according to ZooBank, published on 9 March 2012 
according to the pdf, the registration number is in the pdf, AND the 
entry in ZooBank DOES include an Archive and an ISSN.

Why is the pdf not published in the meaning of Article 8 of the Amendment ?

Cheers,
Laurent -

_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

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

(1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org/

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



________________________________
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