[Taxacom] Bibliographic References

[Paul van Rijckevorsel]

From: "Chris Thompson" <xelaalex at cox.net>
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 4:03 PM

> Sorry, Francisco,

> I am surprise that you do not accept Name & Author or Name & 
> Author & Year as a form of bibliographic reference

***
In botany, the 2000, St Louis Code was altered to emphasize that 
an author citation is not a bibliographic reference (Art. 46.1). The 
idea in zoology that an author citation would be a bibliographic 
reference seems to arise indeed from Art. 12 and 13; these articles
require a bibliographic reference so therefore an author citation 
must be a bibliographic reference.

In botany, for new names established before 1 January 1953 
all that is required is "an indirect reference" (Art. 33.2) while
for new names established on or after 1 January 1953 the
requirement is for a "a full and direct reference given to its 
author and place of valid publication, with page or plate 
reference and date" (Art. 33.4), which saves the hand-
and soul-wringing in zoology of what can and cannot be 
forced into the mould of a "bibliographic reference".

Paul