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

Re: Koreanosaurus (regarding PDFs instead of forelimbs)



On 21 October 2010 14:05, David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at> wrote:
> Â> > and the PhyloCode will require ink on paper
>>
>> ÂWhy on Earth?? The ICZN at least has the excuse that it pre-dates the
>> ÂInternet.
>
> The idea is that one should be able to read all publications of
> nomenclatural acts without any special apparatus (beyond glasses, I
> suppose). Even microfilm is therefore forbidden. Check out Articles 4.2 and
> 4.3: http://www.ohio.edu/phylocode/art4-5.html

See also:
http://svpow.wordpress.com/2010/06/14/i-only-just-realised-the-draft-phylocode-does-not-recognise-electronic-publication/

I remain flabbergasted.

> Besides, the current (4th) edition of the ICZN is from 1999, does not
> predate the Internet, and does not require ink on paper;

That is technically true.  However the 1999 Code was written by
_people_ who predate the Internet, and still regard it with some
suspicion.

> if Internet
> publication is accompanied by CDs deposited in a couple of public
> institutions, that's fine with the ICZN. Has been done; new names have been
> published in Palaeontologia Electronica this way.

And none of them are actually valid.  See
Taylor, Michael P.  2009.  Electronic publication of nomenclatural
acts is inevitable, and will be accepted by the taxonomic community
with or without the endorsement of the Code.  Bulletin of Zoological
Nomenclature 66(3):205-214.
        
http://www.miketaylor.org.uk/dino/pubs/taylor2009b/Taylor2009b-electronic-publishing-of-nomenclatural-acts-is-inevitable.pdf

I quote:

"The respected online journal Palaeontologia Electronica (sponsored by
the Palaeontological Society and the Society of Vertebrate
Palaeontology among others) has
published new names including the sauropod dinosaur Karongasaurus (Gomani,
2005). As described by the journalâs nomenclature statement
(Anonymous, 2007), ten
copies of each issue are printed and deposited at ten archive
libraries, which meets the
requirements of the Code. However, this is done for the beneït of the
ICBN, which
does not recognise CD-ROM as a valid medium of publication under any
circumstances, as the journal covers palaeobotany as well as
palaeozoology. The nomenclature statement says that âthe CD-ROM issue
of Palaeontologia Electronica, to be
deposited at a minimum of ïve archive libraries, provides a permanent
record that
meets the requirements of the ICZN (Article 8.6) for valid and
eïective publicationâ.
In fact, articles such as Gomani (2005) are not validly published, as
the individual
articles in Palaeontologia Electronica do not contain the necessary
statement about
copies being lodged in ïve named libraries. The statement continues, âthe ICZN
recommends that formal nomenclatural citations should be made to the CD-ROM
edition because of the inalterability of that mediumâ, but in fact the
CD-ROMedition
is not published at all according to the requirements of Article 8.6.
This may seem a ïne point, but it illustrates the larger issue that
the current rules
regarding electronic publication appear complex and arbitrary, and are
diïcult to get
right even for journals that make the attempt."


>
>> ÂNot that I'm an especial fan of the Phylocode anyway
>
> Why is that? :-)
>
>