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

Stephen Thorpe stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Sat Sep 8 03:09:28 CDT 2012


well of course a requirement in the Code to register a publication in ZooBank is going to depend on what ZooBank does! I don't see that as being at all relevant to the interpretation of the amendment...
 
it is interesting to note the "compromises" that have been made in the end by the ICZN. Specifically, (1) only the publication needs to be registered, not the new taxa; and (2) only the intention to archive needs to be stated, so presumably the publication still stands as valid even if the intention is never realised? Taken together, this means Zoobank may have no record of the new taxa in a valid publication that has not been archived ...
 
Stephen

From: Paul van Rijckevorsel <dipteryx at freeler.nl>
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu 
Sent: Saturday, 8 September 2012 7:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] e-only publication for zoology, starts today

Stephen,

Of course it is important what was intended by those who wrote it.
However, there is no end of laws that were later reinterpreted, and
that are used in ways that were clearly not intended by those who 
wrote them.

I see there is one more argument that I did not mention. Article
8.5.3.1 and 8.5.3.2 can only be fulfilled if ZooBank holds up its
end. If ZooBank decides to delete a field in the entry then there
is nothing that the issuer of the publication can do. That is,
primary control over fulfilling 8.5.3.1 and 8.5.3.2 rests with
ZooBank. This, while the entire control over fulfilling 8.5.1, 
8.5.2, and 8.5.3 rests with whoever issues the publication. 
These sets of provisions are, arguably, aimed at different people.

On a general note, I am glad to see that the Amendment includes
several Examples, which should greatly help in interpreting the
new text. 

Paul
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Stephen Thorpe 
  To: Paul van Rijckevorsel ; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu 
  Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2012 1:32 AM
  Subject: Re: [Taxacom] e-only publication for zoology, starts today


  Paul,
  Of course anything written in any natural language can be read in more than one way! My reading seems to me to be what was intended, and given inevitable ambiguity, what was intended is surely the most sensible interpretation to go with? However, in the end, it will come down to case by case scrutiny, and I don't think there is any purpose in trying to discuss this any further "in the abstract"...
  Cheers, Stephen


  From: Paul van Rijckevorsel <dipteryx at freeler.nl>
  To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu 
  Sent: Friday, 7 September 2012 9:25 PM
  Subject: Re: [Taxacom] e-only publication for zoology, starts today
_______________________________________________

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


More information about the Taxacom mailing list