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

RE: Is *Duriasaurus* published? was Re: Andesaurus redescribed



David Marjanovic opined:

<Only to members and libraries! But I suppose libraries are enough.>

  I understand this is almost certainly intended to be a narrow interpretation, 
but there are alternatives: the authors have prepare pdf copies of this and 
distribute them, if the publisher allows, and they may receive print copies to 
distribute as well (re-prints) which are typically gratis of the publisher. 
Because abstract data almost always comes with author attributions, and those 
in turn almost always with contact information, emailing the authors for a 
polite request will affirm whether a physical or digital copy can be obtained 
free of charge. This permits the publication to also be available free of 
charge, rather than ONLY through subscriptions or access to particularly lucky 
libraries, or being close to the publisher's office, etc. Photocopying or 
faxing fees can also discount the implied upper cost, without purchasing a 
hardcopy yourself.

Cheers,

Jaime A. Headden
The Bite Stuff (site v2)
http://qilong.wordpress.com/

"Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969)


"Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a
different language and a new way of looking at things, the human race
has had a dream: to kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or
his new way of looking at things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion 
Backs)





----------------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 11:44:10 +0100
> From: david.marjanovic@gmx.at
> To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: Is *Duriasaurus* published? was Re: Andesaurus redescribed
>
> > Publications of the Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society
> > http://research.dorsetcountymuseum.org/
>
> On that page it says:
>
> "Some past volumes are available for purchase; for more details, follow
> this link."
>
> The link leads here http://research.dorsetcountymuseum.org/V.html --
> and, well, I suppose the latest volume counts as published if any
> libraries have a subscription, as is probably the case, or if the Code
> accepts having to become a member of the society as an acceptable
> prerequisite for being able to get the volume (_the Code doesn't tell_).
> If not, however, it will only count as published when 10 more volumes
> will have appeared, and even then only if any copies are left to buy!
>
> Assuming that the paper has already been printed (as the completeness of
> the citation, with page numbers and all, suggests but does not prove),
> let's go through the Code one by one. Of course, convoluted as the Code
> is, the place to start isn't the beginning, it's this:
>
> > Article 13. Names published after 1930.
> >
> > 13.1. Requirements. To be available, every new name published after
> > 1930 must satisfy the provisions of Article 11 and must
>
> What follows (as the rest of Art. 13.1, and as the rest of Art. 13 as a
> whole) are questions that can only be answered by reading the paper (or
> do not apply, like regulations about names at family-group ranks).
> Obviously, I have no reason to suspect these provisions might not be
> fulfilled; they're the well-known ones like having to include a
> description. So, does *Duriatitan* "satisfy the provisions of Article 11"?
>
> > Article 11. Requirements. To be available, a name or, where
> > relevant, a nomenclatural act must satisfy the following provisions:
> >
> > 11.1. Publication. The name or nomenclatural act must have been
> > published, in the meaning of Article 8, after 1757.
>
> The "after 1757" part is obviously fulfilled, so let's check Art. 8:
>
> > Article 8. What constitutes published work. A work is to be regarded
> > as published for the purposes of zoological nomenclature if it
> > complies with the requirements of this Article and is not excluded
> > by the provisions of Article 9.
>
> Oh, great, so we'll need to look at Art. 9, too.
>
> > 8.1. Criteria to be met. A work must satisfy the following criteria:
> >
> > 8.1.1. it must be issued for the purpose of providing a public and
> > permanent scientific record,
>
> Check.
>
> > 8.1.2. it must be obtainable, when first issued, free of charge or by
> > purchase, and
>
> Only to members and libraries! But I suppose libraries are enough.
>
> > 8.1.3. it must have been produced in an edition containing
> > simultaneously obtainable copies by a method that assures numerous
> > identical and durable copies.
>
> It's printed. Check.
>
> > 8.2. Publication may be disclaimed. [...]
> > 8.3. Names and acts may be disclaimed. [...]
> > 8.4. Works produced before 1986. [...]
> > 8.5. Works produced after 1985 and before 2000. [...]
> > 8.6. Works produced after 1999 by a method that does not employ printing
> >on paper.[...]
> > 8.7. Status of suppressed works. A work that has been suppressed for
> > nomenclatural purposes by the Commission by use of the plenary power
> > (Art. 81) [...]
>
> Do not apply.
>
> On to Art. 9:
>
> > Article 9. What does not constitute published work. Notwithstanding
> > the provisions of Article 8, none of the following constitutes
> > published work within the meaning of the Code:
> >
> > 9.1. after 1930 handwriting reproduced in facsimile by any process;
> > 9.2. photographs as such;
> > 9.3. proof sheets;
> > 9.4. microfilms;
> > 9.5. acoustic records as such made by any method;
> > 9.6. labels of specimens;
> > 9.7. copies obtained on demand of an unpublished work
> > (Art. 8), even if previously deposited in a library or other archive;
> > 9.8. text or illustrations distributed by means of electronic signals
> > (e.g. by means of the World Wide Web);or
> > 9.9. abstracts of articles, papers, posters, texts of lectures, and
> similar material
> >when issuedprimarily to participants at meetings, symposia, colloquia or
> > congresses.
>
> Note Art. 9.7: reprints distributed by the authors _*DO NOT COUNT!*_
> However, this appears to be irrelevant in the present case, because the
> paper is published according to Art. 8, assuming that Art. 8.1.2 allows
> its being available only to members and libraries.
>
> Also relevant:
>
> > 21.8. Advance distribution of separates and preprints. Before 2000,
> > an author who distributed separates in advance of the specified date
> > of publication of the work in which the material is published thereby
> > advanced the date of publication. The advance issue of separates
> > after 1999 does not do so, whereas preprints, clearly imprinted with
> > their own date of publication, may be published works from the date
> > of their issue (see Glossary: "separate", "preprint").
>
> "Preprint":
>
> > A work published, with its own specified date of publication (imprint
> date), in advance of its later reissue as part of a collective or
> cumulative work. Preprints may be published works for the purposes of
> zoological nomenclature. See separate.
>
> Separate:
>
> > A copy (reprint or offprint) of a work contained in a periodical,
> book or other larger work, intended for distribution (usually privately
> by the author(s)) detached from the larger work which contains it but
> without its own specified date of publication (imprint date). The
> advance distribution of separates after 1999 does not constitute
> publication for purposes of zoological nomenclature. See preprint.
>
> So, as Art. 9.7 already says: if only reprints are available, the paper
> isn't published.