[Taxacom] LSID versus names

[Jim Croft]

Absolutely... which is why as a community we invest in things like
IPNI, APNI, etc.

But I think there is a risk, if not a problem, in assigning the point
of authority to an abstracted list rather the publication.

Having said that, the crystal ball and bat entrails are insisting that
time and technology will inevitably take us to a place where 'the list
is the thing'. They don't tell me when or how it is going to work, but
they are pretty sure it is going to happen.

jim

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:57 PM, Dr.B.J.Tindall <bti at dsmz.de> wrote:
> Jim,
> Well, if anything is going to be "authoritative" it would have to be the
> fact that certain nomenclatural and taxonomic events/acts have taken place.
> There is no better way of doing this than to make sure that these
> acts/events are properly documented. In bacteriology and virology this is
> via a centralised system. To my knowledge the virologists maintain an
> authoritative list of names on the ICTV website and there were suggestions
> that bacteriologists should do the same - the only issue being who pays the
> bills.
>
> The only issue that is problematic is when there is an "authoritative" list
> (which in bacteriology would document new names and new combinations) and
> other lists surface which are misleading/erroneous and undermine the work of
> those who try to make sure that the "authoritative lists" are accurate.
>
> Brian
>
> Quoting Jim Croft <jim.croft at gmail.com>:
>
>> This kind of thinking is a big problem and one of the reasons we get
>> into messes like this. NONE of these databases is authoritative.  They
>> are not mentioned in the Code, they have not legislated priority and
>> have no official standing in nomenclature or taxonomy at all. They are
>> at best useful and reliable indices to the literature (with the type
>> and cited specimens, the real authority), at worst, incomplete
>> perpetuators of falsehoods.
>>
>> There is no point looking for a single point of truth when there isn't
>> one. Well ok, it might be core business for religion and politics. But
>> it is not going to work for nomenclature and taxonomy, unless we
>> change the Code radically and create one (ducks quickly, to avoid the
>> ugly reg* word).
>>
>> jim
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Roderic Page <r.page at bio.gla.ac.uk>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Plant people are
>>> somewhat better off with IPNI, although one could argue whether we should
>>> regard IPNI, Tropics, or the Plant List as the definitive authority.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> 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) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>
>> (2) a Google search specified as:
>>  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>>
>
>
>
> Dr.B.J.Tindall
> Leibniz-Institut DSMZ-Deutsche Sammlung von
> Mikroorganismen und Zellkulturen GmbH
> Inhoffenstraße 7B
> 38124 Braunschweig
> Germany
> Tel. ++49 531-2616-224
> Fax  ++49 531-2616-418
> http://www.dsmz.de
> Director: Prof. Dr. J. Overmann
> Local court: Braunschweig HRB 2570
> Chairman of the management board: MR Dr. Axel Kollatschny
>
> DSMZ - A member of the Leibniz Association (WGL)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.



-- 
_________________
Jim Croft ~ jim.croft at gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499 ~ http://about.me/jrc
'Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to
pause and reflect.'
- Mark Twain
'A civilized society is one which tolerates eccentricity to the point
of doubtful sanity.'
 - Robert Frost

Please send URLs, not attachments:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html