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

Re: Choosing Twenty-Six Representative Genera

On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 Dinogeorge@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 1/26/01 12:01:56 PM EST, tholtz@geol.umd.edu writes:
> << This list is, sadly, a product of the sort of web-based environment we live
>  now.  People can pull up the "list of all dinosaur names" without any idea
>  if the taxon is based on more than a scrap (or for that matter, is even
>  formally published). >>
> Ya know, this is a good idea. I could add this info to the Dinosaur Genera
> List without a heck of a lot of hassle over the next couple of weeks. Might
> be a good thing to add synonym information, too. Something like:
> Brontosaurus Marsh, 1879 [GS; JS => Apatosaurus]
> which would mean "good specimen, presently considered a junior synonym of
> Apatosaurus."
> Will have to work out a system of codes, particularly for situations such as
> "considered >by some< to be a junior synonym of."

My list <http://dinosauricon.com/genera> covers most of these issues. Only
undisputed _nomina valida et conservanda_ are printed in bold; undescribed
names are not italicized, and unpublished names are furthermore in quotes;
generic (and some specific) synonyms are listed right there (with
distinctions between objective and subjective synonyms); information about
the specimens is only a click away.

I plan to change some of this for the next version (mostly adding new
stuff) -- plans are still a bit nebulous, though.

 Home Page               <http://dinosauricon.com/keesey>
  The Dinosauricon        <http://dinosauricon.com>
   personal                <keesey@bigfoot.com> --> <tmk@dinosauricon.com>
    Dinosauricon-related    <dinosaur@dinosauricon.com>
     AOL Instant Messenger   <Ric Blayze>
      ICQ                     <77314901>
       Yahoo! Messenger        <Mighty Odinn>