[Taxacom] FW: formation of zoological names with Mc, Mac, et

[Paul Kirk]

In the world of mycology, most taxonomist are but one click away from
READING the original publication, having first found the name in Index
Fungorum ... it's all just around the corner for most other groups,
linking everything to everything is what's happening out there. The days
of the author/year being a shorthand link to a publication are gone!

In haste again,

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
[mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Pyle
Sent: 03 September 2009 08:59
To: 'Stephen Thorpe'
Cc: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] FW: formation of zoological names with Mc, Mac,
et


I'm not entirely certain that I'm the one missing the point here....

Most taxonomists over the past 2.5 centuries did not have access to good
databases.  Do you think most of them used author/year for
homonymy/priority exclusively?  Or do you think they might have also
used that information to track down original descriptions?  This is your
quote that I was responding
to:

"The only reason to cite the authority/date with the name is as an
(imperfect) indication of homonymy and priority."

I would have not held you to the "only" part, except for the earlier
post from you that said:

"My main point was that the authority/date isn't intended to point to a
publication, but rather as an (imperfect) indication of homonymy and
priority." 

What is the basis for your suggestion that there is a "trend to
complicate author/date more and more in order to point more effectively
to the original publication."?  I hadn't noticed that trend. 

And, more importantly, what is the basis for your claim, "But this
[locating the original publication] is not what author/date was intended
for!"  You've said this repeatedly, and as I said in the "PS" of one of
my previous posts, I don't know why you seem so certain.

Yes, there is a better way.  A MUCH better way.  Much better, in fact,
than simply "just have a special field on the database page for the
taxon called 'Original publication'".  Here's just one small example of
some background
reading: http://systbio.org/files/phyloinformatics/1.pdf  Here's some
more:
http://tdwg.napier.ac.uk/index.php  Others on this list could point you
to many more examples.

Aloha,
Rich

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Thorpe [mailto:s.thorpe at auckland.ac.nz]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 12:26 PM
> To: Richard Pyle
> Cc: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: RE: [Taxacom] FW: formation of zoological names with Mc, Mac,

> et
> 
> >Not to pick on you, Stephen, but
> Don't worry, I'm used to that! :)
> 
> >I much more often use the author/year information to help me
> track down
> >the original publication in which the name was established
> Yes, I know! It is difficult to make what I am saying completely 
> clear, without some "loose talk", but you are missing a point about 
> the context of this discussion.
> Without good databases, we are forced to resort to using author/date 
> as a clue to point us in the direction of the original publication. 
> This leads to a trend to complicate author/date more and more in order

> to point more effectively to the original publication. But this is not

> what author/date was intended for! Given that we are now at a stage in

> history where comprehensive taxonomic databases are in the pipeline 
> (too darn many of them, in fact), I am saying that there is a better 
> way: just have a special field on the database page for the taxon 
> called 'Original publication', and leave the poor old author/date the 
> way it was intended to be. My made up example, again (imagine it as 
> part of a database page):
> 
> Name: Examplus primus Smith, 1970
> Original publication: Smith, A.B., jr. 1970: Revision of Examplus. 
> Journal of hypothetical taxonomy, 1: 1-2.
> [publication date: 1 January 1970]
> 
> Note that the author/date are in the name field (as they are in any 
> sensible taxonomic database), implying that they are part of the name 
> in some meaningful sense, despite an overly pedantic interpretation of

> the Code denying this! I guess one of the many inconsistencies in the 
> Code is that it says author/date isn't part of the name, but then 
> treats it as part of the name in many contexts...
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Stephen
> ________________________________________
> From: Richard Pyle [deepreef at bishopmuseum.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, 2 September 2009 9:47 p.m.
> To: Stephen Thorpe; 'Chris Lyal'; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: RE: [Taxacom] FW: formation of zoological names with Mc, Mac,

> et
> 
> Not to pick on you, Stephen, but:
> 
> > The only reason to cite the authority/date with the name is as an
> > (imperfect) indication of homonymy and priority.
> 
> Yes, this is "a" reason.  No, it is not the *only* reason.  I much 
> more often use the author/year information to help me track down the 
> original publication in which the name was established, than I do for 
> disambiguating homonyms or assessing priority. You can make all the 
> claims you want about what the "real" reason is for citing 
> authorships, but that doesn't change how I most often *use* that 
> information.
> And I don't only use it for that purpose when wearing my taxonomy-nerd

> hat; I also use it that way when wearing my database-nerd hat. I agree

> with Chris: "shouldn't we be compiling use cases of what they *are* 
> used for?"
> 
> Aloha,
> Rich=



_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
these methods:

(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org

Or (2) a Google search specified as:
site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here

Find out about CABI's global summit on 'Food security in a climate of change' at www.cabiglobalsummit.com 
19 - 21 October 2009, London, UK.

************************************************************************
The information contained in this e-mail and any files transmitted with it is confidential and is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient please note that any distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is prohibited. 

Whilst CAB International trading as CABI takes steps to prevent the transmission of viruses via e-mail, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail or attachment is free from computer viruses and you are strongly advised to undertake your own anti-virus precautions.

If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by e-mail at cabi at cabi.org or by telephone on +44 (0)1491 829199 and then delete the e-mail and any copies of it.

CABI is an International Organization recognised by the UK Government under Statutory Instrument 1982 No. 1071.

**************************************************************************