[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: [dinosaur] is Lisowicia an available name?
This is a good question with no answer: the Code nowhere mentions supplementary
information â there is no hint as to whether supp. inf. of a properly
published paper should be considered part of the paper (and thus published) or
not. Somebody should ask the Commission to make a Declaration (assuming they
still aren't working on the next version of the Code; I've been told the
current one was only expected to last 10 years or so, not 20 and counting).
The PhyloCode is explicit, BTW: supp. inf. is not published, and anything
necessary for a nomenclatural act must not be placed there. But the PhyloCode
doesn't govern *Lisowicia*.