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

Laurent Raty l.raty at skynet.be
Thu Sep 6 03:02:23 CDT 2012


On 09/05/2012 11:31 PM, Stephen Thorpe wrote:
> Clarification needed! Surely, even if had not been published in print, a
> PDF cannot be considered validly published if its stated date of
> publication (in the work itself) is before 4 Sep 2012, even if it (now)
> has a ZooBank registration compliant with the amendment??

Why not, Stephen? There's nothing in the Amendment that says that the 
Archive designation must have been present in the ZooBank entry from the 
beginning.

8.5.3: The work must "be registered in the Official Register of 
Zoological Nomenclature (ZooBank)" (no actual specification of when this 
must have occurred). And it must "contain evidence in the work itself 
that such registration has occurred" (thus the registration must have 
occurred before the work content was finalised).

8.5.3.1: "The entry in the Official Register of Zoological Nomenclature 
must give [...]". This is a simple present tense: I can't read this any 
other way than "this must so /now/".

Both are fulfilled /now/, thus it seems to me that the pdf is validly 
published. Of course, as long as 8.5.3.1 was not met, the work was 
logically unpublished. Thus, as Rich noted, the real publication date 
should be when the designation was added.


Perhaps it could be argued that it's not the case because the date of 
publication as stated in the pdf is actually incorrect, hence 8.5.2 is 
not "really" met? But arguing so might be a slippery slope, as the 
reasoning would then have to be extended to any other e-publication 
claiming a date not fully correct...

(Also, the word "publication" seems to be used inconsistently in this 
part of the Amendment, which might make this type of argument 
problematic. In any case, the examples that are associated to 8.5.3.3 
very clearly use "published" in a sense that is /not/ "meeting the 
provisions of Article 8-9". In fact, the wording of this part of the 
Amendment - 8.5.3.3 + associated examples - leaves me very much perplexed.)


Cheers,
L -




> *From:* Richard Pyle <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>
> *To:* 'Laurent Raty' <l.raty at skynet.be>; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> *Sent:* Thursday, 6 September 2012 9:05 AM
> *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...
>
> Certain components of the ZooBank back-end database are immutable.
>
>  > 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
> ?
>
> The PDF was not published in the meaning of Article 8 of the Amendment prior
> to September 4th, because prior to September 4th there was no indication of
> the intended Archive in ZooBank.  The PDF could have been considered as
> published after September 4th, but the date of publication for purposes of
> priority would be applied to the paper edition, numerous copies of which
> were simultaneously obtainable in March.
>
> Aloha,
> Rich
>
>
> 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.
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu <mailto: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
>
>





More information about the Taxacom mailing list