[Taxacom] A romp through an aggregator

[Stephen Thorpe]

>Just don't mention year 2000 anyone
Why not? Are you referring to the Y2K bug, or to the N.Z. Species2000 inventory, both of which made an equally anticlimactic contribution to that year, I seem to recall ... perhaps Y2K bug is also just late coming ???? :)




________________________________
From: Geoffrey Read <gread at actrix.gen.nz>
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Sent: Wed, 26 May, 2010 3:27:57 PM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] A romp through an aggregator


On Wed, May 26, 2010, Stephen Thorpe wrote:

> my understanding is that the task is to integrate published primary
> taxonomic information into a coherent whole
>
> this need not involve taxonomists (like Bob Mesibov, for example) who can
> continue to publish primary taxonomy (and ought not to compete with them
> for funding). The primary taxonomist's job is still primary!

I'm sure this is correct. We should leave finessing the taxonomy data to
the computer science graduates. We taxonomists will only make it messy,
and after all they made such a good job of their development history,
unlike our shortsighted reliance on ambiguous two-unit identifiers.

Just don't mention year 2000 anyone.

:^) Geoff


_______________________________________________

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