[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: naming conventions and the Net?

In a message dated 95-08-11 22:37:01 EDT, bcunning@nssi.com (Cunningham,
Betty) writes:

>        Will the ICZN ever recognise such things as the Dinosaur List as an 
>     official publication?   Do they need the article to be 'edited' to be 
>     official?
>        Will the ICZN consider e-mail on such a broad mailing list (larger 
>     than much of Bakker's self-published magazine's mailing list) as 
>     sufficient peers to be recognised as official?
>        What do you professionals think?  Especially since the mail is also 
>     available as a digest, and can be downloaded even after the original 
>     date of publication.  Thus perhaps satisfying the availability to the 
>     science community.

Electronic lists are not currently (no pun intended!) regarded as proper
publications, of course. The reason likely stems from the immutability of the
PRINTED word. Electronic publications are too easily altered in retrospect,
and it would be very difficult to establish which of several different
versions of a paper is "original." Dates, times, words can all be untraceably
altered in the electronic media by knowledgeable individuals who might be
interested in claiming copyright, priority of publication, and so forth.

Editing and availability to the scientific community are important but
secondary considerations.

George O.