Errors = phantom names on the Internet [ Scanned for viruses ]

[Paul Kirk]

Chris,

'but there is to my knowedge no equivalent being considered for botany'

we have MycoBank (http://www.mycobank.org/) in mycology (since mid 2005) so things are happening in botany sensu ICBN.

Paul

Dr Paul M. Kirk
Biosystematist
CABI Bioscience
Bakeham Lane
Egham
Surrey TW20 9TY
UK

tel. (+44) (0)1491 829023, fax (+44) (0)1491 829100, email p.kirk at cabi.org
www.cabi-bioscience.org  www.indexfungorum.org


-----Original Message-----
From: Taxacom Discussion List [mailto:TAXACOM at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU]On
Behalf Of Chris Lyal
Sent: 29 March 2006 09:06
To: TAXACOM at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU
Subject: Re: [TAXACOM] Errors = phantom names on the Internet [ Scanned
for viruses ]


I'm with Rich.  Whether we as taxonomists 'meant' the name to be out there or not is now irrelevant.  It is known outside of Chris's database and those that have used it; it has an independant life.  Whilst Chris (or any one of us) could edit Wikipedia and state that the beast has no real existence, the name is still being used in some sense.  Therefore, just as we deal with other unavailable names by identifying them as such in catalogues, so we should with this.  The ITIS record should be emended to identify the name as unavailable (not published) and,when we get ZooBank up and running, registered there also as unavailable.  We do not need to have 'loose ends' flying about in the net - cutting off the end that is tied down is one solution, but a better one is tying down the end that is loose.

This does bring up the issue of web publication again.  Despite Chris's best efforts and clearly stated intentions, and despite the injunctions of the current Code, de facto web publication has taken place.  Once we place taxonomic/nomenclatural information on the web, whatever we say or beleive, someone somewhere will take it as a 'real' publication.  Given that we are not going to stop placing taxonomic information on the web - quite the reverse! - we have to develop a method of dealing with the situation very rapidly.  ZooBank should provide a means to demonstrate whether there is Code compliance of animal names, but there is to my knowedge no equivalent being considered for botany.  Even with ZooBank, we face a potential disjunction between what the ICZN and taxonomists say can be used and what web users *will* use.  To deal with this we need to have modifications of the Codes, and be sure that the global list of names and concepts is very easily accessible.  This list must also be easily annotated, so that comments in a case such as this can be made public a.s.a.p., and not lost. 

Cheers,
Chris

Christopher H. C. Lyal,
Beetle Diversity and Evolution Programme,
Department of Entomology,
The Natural History Museum,
Cromwell Road,
London SW7 5BD
UK
tel: +44 (0) 207 942 5113
fax: +44 (0) 207 942 5661
e-mail c.lyal at nhm.ac.uk
URLs:
personal page - http://www.nhm.ac.uk//research-curation/staff-directory/entomology/cv-3569.html
electronic Biologia Centrali-Americana -
http://www.sil.si.edu/digitalcollections/bca
World Catalogue of Weevil Names - http://wtaxa.csic.es/