[Taxacom] EJT, European journal for taxonomy

[Doug Yanega]

>Quoting from the website (third paragraph):
>
>   "Printed versions of EJT papers will be distributed to some major
>    natural history museums and institutions to comply with the rules
>    of the different nomenclatural codes."

It is remarkable how many people seem to think that the Zoological 
Code contains a requirement that paper copies be deposited in a 
library.

The actual quote of the relevant part of the ICZN is Art. 8.1.3, which says:

"it must have been produced in an edition containing simultaneously 
obtainable copies by a method that assures numerous identical and 
durable copies."

The provisions regarding dissemination and deposition, etc., are all 
listed as Recommendations (Recs. 8A-8E, in particular). 
Recommendations are simply instructions for good practice, and are 
not *required* for a work to be Code-compliant.

If the printed versions of the EJT papers do not fit the explicit 
criteria above ("simultaneously obtainable" and "method that assures 
identical and durable copies"), then they are not published, and if 
they do fit the criteria, then they ARE published - regardless of how 
many libraries have received copies.

The Code explicitly prohibits print-on-demand, and the boundary 
between (into which the EJT may fall) is a gray area. The relevant 
Article is 9.7, which prohibits "copies obtained on demand of an 
unpublished work [Art. 8], even if previously deposited in a library 
or other archive"

You will note from the wording of this Article that just because 
something is printed, and in a library, does NOT mean it is published 
as far as the Code is concerned; it MUST satisfy Article 8, which 
makes requirements regarding *HOW* it was printed. The reason this is 
a gray area should be obvious: a person printing out a dozen copies 
on their home laser printer can argue that, technically, all 12 
copies were printed from the same computer file, and therefore 
identical, and that they were all simultaneously obtainable. If this 
was literally how the copies were produced, it probably would be 
Code-compliant, but the problem is that there is no objective method 
of determining whether this is in fact how it *was* done. That person 
COULD have printed one copy one day, two copies the next day, another 
copy three days later (with a typo fixed), two more copies the 
following day, and so forth, and thus NOT been Code-compliant. We 
would have only their personal word that they were all printed at one 
time, and all identical. I would accordingly argue that the use of a 
computer printer is accordingly not a method that *assures* anything 
(as opposed to, say, a printing press). If such a case were ever put 
forth to the Commission, it could possibly be contentious.

Certainly, at the time these Articles were first incorporated into 
the Code, private individuals did not have much, if any, capacity to 
self-publish Code-compliant works, but now they do (and conversely, 
genuine publishers have been migrating away from the printing press). 
Much of the debate and argument (both historically and today) centers 
around the archival nature of a given method of production - and that 
leaves lots of room for argument, as you can imagine.

Brian Taylor wrote:

>Yep!  And how long have we been waiting for the "voluntary" ICZN - who
>appointed/elected the Commissioners - to fall off the fence?

Speaking as an ICZN Commissioner, we fell off the fence years ago, 
and have been working for quite some time now on drafting a policy to 
incorporate electronic publication into the Code. As with all such 
matters of red tape, drafting new policies takes time (especially 
when dealing with arguments such as the one above) - so please don't 
think that just because we have not *yet* issued a revision to the 
Code, that we have no intention of *ever* doing so. If you're going 
to criticize us, please be certain of the facts first.

Sincerely,
-- 

Doug Yanega        Dept. of Entomology         Entomology Research Museum
Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0314        skype: dyanega
phone: (951) 827-4315 (standard disclaimer: opinions are mine, not UCR's)
              http://cache.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html
   "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
         is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82