(Fwd) Re: (Fwd) ICBN Articles 33.2 & 33.3

[Rodham E. Tulloss]

I believe that the first article governs publication at present (how
one should write an article proposing a new name today).  The second
article refers to liberal interpretation of old authors.  At least that
is the way I have always thought about the pair in question.

And...I heartily concur with Mike Vincent's comments about full pagination
of the original description (if that happens to be the same as the
pagination of the article in which the name is proposed, OK).  It might
be just as worthy an approach (for easy of photocopy access, for example)
if the rule were to allow citation of all page number on which the
epithet in question or the new species is referenced in the article
containing the original description (say on first and last pages
in summary comments, on page 133 in comparison to another new taxon, and
on pages 129-131 in the full original description).

In other words, there should be no harm in "indexing" the original
publication.

Very best,

Rod