[Taxacom] Objective synonyms?

[Stephen Thorpe]

Can you give an example (or provide a link to the article)? The way you explain it makes it unclear to me exactly what the issue is. One thing is for sure, that there aren't any universally agreed definitions (in ICZN at least) for what counts as a synonym. For example, previous combinations are just that, and may or may not be considered synonyms as such ... synonymy in a strict sense is a relation between types (conspecific, or not), not names

Stephen




________________________________
From: Curtis Clark <lists at curtisclark.org>
To: TAXACOM <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Sent: Sat, 29 May, 2010 2:16:30 PM
Subject: [Taxacom] Objective synonyms?

Have there been recent changes to ICZN deprecating the concept of 
objective synonym? There is an editor on Wikipedia, otherwise 
well-respected, who is claiming that names in different genera with the 
same epithet (he doesn't say homotypic, but all of his examples are) are 
not synonyms. I know this is incorrect for ICBN (and with little effort 
I could find chapter and verse), but I don't have enough familiarity 
with the current ICZN to either correct myself or counter the argument.


-- 
Curtis Clark                  http://www.csupomona.edu/~jcclark/
Director, I&IT Web Development                  +1 909 979 6371
University Web Coordinator, Cal Poly Pomona

_______________________________________________

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