[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: The PhyloCode will not address the naming of species (Joke)
John Conway writes:
> > I am very pleased about this: I think that the perceived threat
> > of the PhyloCode to rank-based codes has been severely
> > exacerbated by perception that its "attack" might extend to
> > species as well (mostly suprageneric) taxon names. I am much
> > more hopeful for a reconciliation between PhyloCoders and
> > traditionalists now that it is understood what the
> > responsibilities of the two codes are, and how little they
> > overlap.
> Aw geez, the phylocode has totally sold out to the man! We were going to
> take over the world with our hyphenated unomials! Now I don't believe in
> anything any more!
Actually, the solution to the binomial problem -- using "genus" names
in quotes as a praenomen understood not to be a clade address -- seems
eminently practical and really ought to be acceptable to both sides.
I'm surprised (with the benefit of hindsight) that this wasn't one of
the methods proposed in Cantino et al. 1999. Though it differs only
in spelling from Method A.
/o ) \/ Mike Taylor <firstname.lastname@example.org> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\ "Perfection [in design] is achieved not when there is nothing
more to add, but rather when there is nothing more to take away"
-- Antoine Saint-Exupery.