[Taxacom] Nomenclatural availability of preliminary electronic versions of taxonomic papers

Stephen Thorpe stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Fri Oct 16 17:33:48 CDT 2015


Taking a case to the Commission is not a good way of solving minor problems, which tend to be too frequent, and would take too long to process, and the outcome would be kind of trivial. For example, if, as often happens, someone designates a lectotype without stating "here designated" (or equivalent), it technically isn't a valid designation. However, for all intents and purposes, it is valid. The specimen will still be stored as a lectotype in a collection, still be treated as the lectotype, and if anyone can be bothered re-designating it (hopefully not in a paper devoted to the task!), they should (except for very rare cases) designate the same specimen. So, what's the @#$!ing point??

--------------------------------------------
On Sat, 17/10/15, Michael A. Ivie <mivie at montana.edu> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Nomenclatural availability of preliminary electronic versions of taxonomic papers
 To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 Received: Saturday, 17 October, 2015, 10:42 AM
 
 I agree with Stephen on this, and our
 current system for this is the 
 Commission.  The most important role of the Commission
 on a day-to-day 
 basis is to allow that the Code be violated for just the
 reasons Stephen 
 wants [Writing a new Code is recognized, but separate from
 this issue].  
 The problem is that the process is too slow and uncertain as
 it stands 
 now.  The Open Case section of the ICZN Website is
 years behind 
 <http://iczn.org/content/list-open-cases> and we find
 ourselves working 
 back in an exclusively paper-based system of reading and
 commenting on 
 Cases.  The Applications Received is the same.  If
 you know a Case 
 number that has appeared in the Bulletin, you may not find
 it on the 
 Website. Case 3681 was published in the Bulletin (on paper)
 in June 
 2015, but there is no way to see it or comment on it
 electronically.  
 There are reasons for this, but the fact remains we have
 gone back to a 
 pre-internet system of fixing problems.  It therefore
 becomes up to the 
 author on his or her own initiative to  "adopt[ed] an
 approach whereby 
 if there is a name which clearly is intended to apply to a
 taxon, then 
 we can and should use it for that taxon, regardless of any
 minor doubts 
 regarding whether or not the name 'really is' Code
 compliant."
 
 Rich's requirement of a whole new approach seems to cry out
 even louder.
 
 Mike
 
 
 On 10/16/2015 3:07 PM, Stephen Thorpe wrote:
 > At the end of the day, we, as taxonomists, should be
 primarily concerned with taxa, and only secondarily
 concerned with their names (nomenclature). If one tries to
 treat the Code along the lines of a legal document, or as an
 algorithm, one will quickly end up tied up in contradictory
 knots. Therefore, I have adopted an approach whereby if
 there is a name which clearly is intended to apply to a
 taxon, then we can and should use it for that taxon,
 regardless of any minor doubts regarding whether or not the
 name "really is" Code compliant.
 >
 > Stephen
 >
 > --------------------------------------------
 > On Sat, 17/10/15, Richard Pyle <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>
 wrote:
 >
 >   Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Nomenclatural
 availability of preliminary electronic    versions
 of taxonomic papers
 >   To: "'Roderic Page'" <Roderic.Page at glasgow.ac.uk>,
 taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 >   Cc: "'John Noyes'" <j.noyes at nhm.ac.uk>
 >   Received: Saturday, 17 October, 2015,
 9:17 AM
 >
 >   <rant>
 >
 >   The answer has always been
 >   obvious to me.  In the age of the
 emerging internet (and
 >   yes, it is very-much still emerging --
 we've only just
 >   begun to see the changes to
 information exchange amongst
 >   humans), we need to fundamentally
 re-think how we establish
 >   nomenclatural availability (at least
 for as long as we
 >   continue to use Linnean
 nomenclature).
 >
 >   For 250 years, the practice of
 taxonomy has
 >   grown in a context where the primary
 mechanism of
 >   information exchange among humans was
 ink symbols affixed to
 >   "very thin slices of wood" (as Paul
 Kirk likes to
 >   say). For more than a hundred years,
 the Codes of
 >   nomenclature have been framed around
 that fundamental
 >   foundation (paper-printed
 works).  Now, and in the
 >   near-term future, the primary
 mechanism of information
 >   exchange is to transmit binary data
 encoded in standardized
 >   formats (UTF-8, JPEG, PDF, etc.) via
 the internet.  The
 >   Commission had to scramble to
 accommodate this rapid
 >   paradigm shift in the form of an
 Amendment to the Code, but
 >   that was really just a temporary
 band-aid.
 >
 >   For the next edition of the
 >   Code, I sincerely hope we can
 fundamentally change the way
 >   in which new names are established and
 anchored to
 >   biological organisms. Specifically,
 rather than awkwardly
 >   try to force-fit our legacy system
 (ink-on-paper) into an
 >   electronic form (e.g., PDFs, with
 arbitrary and artificial
 >   "pages"), we should re-engineer the
 entire process
 >   in such a way that we EMBRACE the
 potential for electronic
 >   information exchange and
 management.  The simplest step in
 >   that direction is to de-couple the
 scientific notion of
 >   "Publication" from the legal process
 of
 >   nomenclatural availability.  In
 other words:
 >   "registered=available".
 >
 >   The devil is in the details, of course
 -- and
 >   in this case, it's about what
 "registered"
 >   actually means.  I'm not talking
 about what ZooBank
 >   currently does.  I'm talking
 about a brave new approach
 >   that re-crafts the rules for
 nomenclatural availability into
 >   a form that can be translated into
 pure logical rules that
 >   computer algorithms can rigorously
 enforce.  If done right,
 >   Homonymy can be eliminated entirely,
 Synonymy can likely be
 >   reduced (and when it exists, much more
 easily managed), and
 >   we will NEVER AGAIN have to argue
 about what constitutes a
 >   "published work" in the sense of the
 Code.  This
 >   is just the tip of the iceberg for how
 we can simultaneously
 >   improve nomenclatural stability AND
 increase access to
 >   information through embracing the
 electronic information
 >   paradigm, rather than futzing around
 the edges of it (as we
 >   do now).
 >
 >   </rant>
 >
 >   Aloha,
 >   Rich
 >
 >
 >   >
 >   -----Original Message-----
 >   > From:
 >   Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu]
 >   On Behalf
 >   > Of Roderic Page
 >   > Sent: Friday, October 16, 2015
 7:09 AM
 >   > To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 >   > Cc: John Noyes
 >   >
 >   Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Nomenclatural
 availability of
 >   preliminary electronic
 >   > versions of
 >   taxonomic papers
 >   >
 >   >
 >   Hopefully eBooks (similar to Kindle),
 HTML, XML will never
 >   be accepted as
 >   > pubs under the Code
 >   because they are dynamic.
 >   >
 >   > And that, in a nutshell, is why
 some of us
 >   despair at the current state of
 >   >
 >   taxonomy. Do we really wish that some
 of the more innovative
 >   means of
 >   > publishing (never mind what
 >   will come in the future) are never
 accepted.
 >   > Never, really?
 >   >
 >   > Regards
 >   >
 >   > Rod
 >   >
 >   >
 >   ---------------------------------------------------------
 >   > Roderic Page
 >   >
 >   Professor of Taxonomy
 >   > Institute of
 >   Biodiversity, Animal Health and
 Comparative Medicine College
 >   of
 >   > Medical, Veterinary and Life
 >   Sciences Graham Kerr Building
 University of
 >   > Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK
 >   >
 >   > Email:  Roderic.Page at glasgow.ac.uk<mailto:Roderic.Page at glasgow.ac.uk>
 >   > Tel:  +44 141 330 4778
 >   > Skype:  rdmpage
 >   >
 >   Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/rdmpage
 >   > LinkedIn:  http://uk.linkedin.com/in/rdmpage
 >   > Twitter:  http://twitter.com/rdmpage
 >   > Blog:  http://iphylo.blogspot.com
 >   > ORCID:  http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7101-9767
 >   > Citations:
 >   > http://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?hl=en&user=4Z5WABAAAAAJ
 >   > ResearchGate https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Roderic_Page
 >   >
 >   >
 >   > On 16 Oct 2015, at 17:48, John
 Noyes
 >   > <j.noyes at nhm.ac.uk<mailto:j.noyes at nhm.ac.uk>>
 >   wrote:
 >   >
 >   > Rod,
 >   >
 >   > What you are talking
 >   about here (E-books etc.) are not
 publications under
 >   > the ICZN so they are not really
 relevant.
 >   We are only talking about e-pubs
 >   > that
 >   are accepted under the current Code.
 Hopefully eBooks
 >   (similar to
 >   > Kindle), HTML, XML will
 >   never be accepted as pubs under the
 Code because
 >   > they are dynamic.
 >   >
 >   > John
 >   >
 >   > John Noyes
 >   > Scientific
 >   Associate
 >   > Department of Life
 >   Sciences
 >   > Natural History Museum
 >   > Cromwell Road
 >   > South
 >   Kensington
 >   > London SW7 5BD
 >   > UK
 >   > jsn at nhm.ac.uk<mailto:jsn at nhm.ac.uk>
 >   > Tel.: +44 (0) 207 942 5594
 >   > Fax.: +44 (0) 207 942 5229
 >   >
 >   > Universal
 >   Chalcidoidea Database (everything you
 wanted to know
 >   about
 >   > chalcidoids and more):
 >   > www.nhm.ac.uk/chalcidoids<http://www.nhm.ac.uk/chalcidoids>
 >   >
 >   > From: Roderic Page
 >   [mailto:Roderic.Page at glasgow.ac.uk]
 >   > Sent: 16 October 2015 17:40
 >   > To:
 >   > taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
 >   > Cc: Laurent Raty; John Noyes
 >   > Subject: Re: [Taxacom]
 Nomenclatural
 >   availability of preliminary
 electronic
 >   >
 >   versions of taxonomic papers
 >   >
 >   > Isn’t part of the issue here
 that we are
 >   applying one notion of locating text
 >   >
 >   (page number) to a situation where the
 notion of “page”
 >   may be fuzzy at
 >   > best?
 >   >
 >   > Documents such as
 >   web pages or eBooks either don’t
 have pages, or the
 >   > “page” may change depending
 on font
 >   size, device screen, etc.
 >   >
 >   > People who develop software to
 annotate
 >   web pages, eBook pages, etc.
 >   > have
 >   multiple ways of locating bits of
 text, such as XPaths
 >   [fragments of the
 >   > HTML or XML that may
 >   underly the document], text fragments
 before and
 >   > after, number of characters into
 the
 >   document, etc. These work, as anyone
 >   >
 >   highlighting text in the Kindle app or
 iBooks, or indeed
 >   Google Docs or Word
 >   > will attest.
 >   >
 >   > The nature of
 >   “publication" has changed, so we
 need to embrace
 >   more
 >   > general notions of location in
 >   documents. This is a problem others
 have
 >   > faced, and solved.
 >   >
 >
 >   > Regards
 >   >
 >   > Rod
 >   >
 >   >
 >   ---------------------------------------------------------
 >   > Roderic Page
 >   >
 >   Professor of Taxonomy
 >   > Institute of
 >   Biodiversity, Animal Health and
 Comparative Medicine College
 >   of
 >   > Medical, Veterinary and Life
 >   Sciences Graham Kerr Building
 University of
 >   > Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK
 >   >
 >   > Email:  Roderic.Page at glasgow.ac.uk<mailto:Roderic.Page at glasgow.ac.uk>
 >   > Tel:  +44 141 330 4778
 >   > Skype:  rdmpage
 >   >
 >   Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/rdmpage
 >   > LinkedIn:  http://uk.linkedin.com/in/rdmpage
 >   > Twitter:  http://twitter.com/rdmpage
 >   > Blog:  http://iphylo.blogspot.com<http://iphylo.blogspot.com/>
 >   > ORCID:  http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7101-9767
 >   > Citations:
 >   > http://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?hl=en&user=4Z5WABAAAAAJ
 >   > ResearchGate https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Roderic_Page
 >   >
 >   > On 16 Oct 2015, at
 >   16:33, John Noyes
 >   > <j.noyes at nhm.ac.uk<mailto:j.noyes at nhm.ac.uk>>
 >   wrote:
 >   >
 >   > The page
 >   number must definitely be fixed.
 Otherwise it might become
 >   a
 >   > nightmare, or at best a
 confusing
 >   pain, to give a meaningful citation to
 a
 >   > nomenclatural act in on-line or
 even hard
 >   copy databases/catalogues,
 >   > especially
 >   where longer publications are
 concerned. That is the
 >   absolute crux
 >   > of the matter. If the
 >   text and other associated details
 remain the same then I
 >   > have absolutely no problem. It is
 the
 >   change in page number between early
 >   >
 >   pubs and final pubs that makes all the
 difference!
 >   >
 >   > John
 >   >
 >   > John Noyes
 >   > Scientific Associate
 >   >
 >   Department of Life Sciences
 >   > Natural
 >   History Museum
 >   > Cromwell Road
 >   > South Kensington
 >   >
 >   London SW7 5BD
 >   > UK
 >   >
 >   jsn at nhm.ac.uk<mailto:jsn at nhm.ac.uk>
 >   > Tel.: +44 (0) 207 942 5594
 >   > Fax.: +44 (0) 207 942 5229
 >   >
 >   > Universal
 >   Chalcidoidea Database (everything you
 wanted to know
 >   about
 >   > chalcidoids and more):
 >   > www.nhm.ac.uk/chalcidoids<http://www.nhm.ac.uk/chalcidoids>
 >   >
 >   > -----Original
 >   Message-----
 >   > From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu]
 >   On Behalf
 >   > Of Laurent Raty
 >   > Sent: 16 October 2015 16:21
 >   > To:
 >   > taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
 >   > Subject: Re: [Taxacom]
 Nomenclatural
 >   availability of preliminary
 electronic
 >   >
 >   versions of taxonomic papers
 >   >
 >   > On 10/16/2015 03:47 PM, Scott
 Thomson
 >   wrote:
 >   >
 >   > In
 >   response to Laurent. I agree there
 seems to be no real and
 >   absolute final
 >   > version if you count the
 >   adding of #tags as a part of the
 document.
 >   >
 >   > Well, I think that,
 >   ideally, it should (have) be(en)
 possible for the user to
 >   > assess the integrity of a work
 distributed
 >   electronically. If a publication had
 >   >
 >   been defined as a given distributed
 file, with a fixed
 >   sequence of bytes, this
 >   > would (have)
 >   be(en) fully straightforward--all it
 requires is that a
 >   checksum
 >   > value be released together
 >   with the original work. This is fairly
 standard
 >   > practice for other types of
 files
 >   distributed through the Internet.
 >   >
 >   Assessing the integrity of a "content
 and layout",
 >   if the file is allowed to
 >   > change, is at
 >   best a nightmare.
 >   >
 >   >
 >   OTOH, I'm not sure there's a real,
 deep, qualitative
 >   difference between
 >   > allowing file
 >   alteration as a result of a change in
 a download date and
 >   ip
 >   > address added to the footer, and
 >   allowing file alteration as a result
 of a
 >   > change in a page number added to
 the
 >   header.
 >   > Thus if you *must* allow the
 >   file to change, is it really worth the
 effort to
 >   > require that the page numbers be
 >   fixed...?
 >   >
 >   > L -
 >   >
 >   _______________________________________________
 >   > Taxacom Mailing List
 >   >
 >   Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
 >   > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 >   > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992
 may be
 >   searched at:
 >   > http://taxacom.markmail.org<http://taxacom.markmail.org/>
 >   >
 >   > Celebrating 28 years
 >   of Taxacom in 2015.
 >   >
 >   _______________________________________________
 >   > Taxacom Mailing List
 >   >
 >   Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
 >   > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 >   > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992
 may be
 >   searched at:
 >   > http://taxacom.markmail.org<http://taxacom.markmail.org/>
 >   >
 >   > Celebrating 28 years
 >   of Taxacom in 2015.
 >   >
 >   >
 >   _______________________________________________
 >   > Taxacom Mailing List
 >   >
 >   Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 >   > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 >   > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992
 may be
 >   searched at:
 >   > http://taxacom.markmail.org
 >   >
 >   > Celebrating 28 years
 >   of Taxacom in 2015.
 >
 >   _______________________________________________
 >   Taxacom Mailing List
 >   Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 >   http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 >   The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may
 be
 >   searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
 >
 >   Celebrating 28 years of
 >   Taxacom in 2015.
 >
 > _______________________________________________
 > Taxacom Mailing List
 > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
 >
 > Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
 
 -- 
 __________________________________________________
 
 Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.
 
 Montana Entomology Collection
 Marsh Labs, Room 50
 1911 West Lincoln Street
 NW corner of Lincoln and S.19th
 Montana State University
 Bozeman, MT 59717
 USA
 
 (406) 994-4610 (voice)
 (406) 994-6029 (FAX)
 mivie at montana.edu
 
 _______________________________________________
 Taxacom Mailing List
 Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
 
 Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
 



More information about the Taxacom mailing list