[Taxacom] Important note Re: two names online published - one new species

Frank T. Krell Frank.Krell at dmns.org
Wed Jan 27 14:37:48 CST 2016


Stephen,
We are in agreement in all points here. Several Commissioners are already bothered, and we will see if the whole Commission can agree (at least in majority) to proceed in this direction. It might well do. I think most already agreed that some sort of action and clarification is necessary.

Frank

Dr Frank T. Krell
Curator of Entomology 
Commissioner, International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature
Chair, ICZN ZooBank Committee
Department of Zoology 
Denver Museum of Nature & Science 
2001 Colorado Boulevard 
Denver, CO 80205-5798 USA 
Frank.Krell at dmns.org 
Phone: (+1) (303) 370-8244 
Fax: (+1) (303) 331-6492 
http://www.dmns.org/science/museum-scientists/frank-krell
lab page: http://www.dmns.org/krell-lab

Test your powers of observation in The International Exhibition of Sherlock Holmes, open until January 31. And prepare your palate for Chocolate: The Exhibition, opening February 12.

The Denver Museum of Nature & Science salutes the citizens of metro Denver for helping fund arts, culture and science through their support of the Scientific and Cultural Facilities District (SCFD). 



Frank



-----Original Message-----
From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen Thorpe
Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 1:25 PM
To: 'Stephen Thorpe' <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu; Laurent Raty <l.raty at skynet.be>; John Noyes <j.noyes at nhm.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Important note Re: two names online published - one new species

Hi John,

>It is still a big mess and nothing is clear<

On that we agree (except, of course, that it isn't a mess and nothing is unclear if we are talking about the Zootaxa publishing model).

>If we have a code of zoological nomenclature we must follow what it 
>says not what someone says it is supposed to say or should say<

On this I can't quite agree, for the following reason: language is inherently vague and ambiguous. You have already said that "nothing is clear", and I have agreed. Therefore one cannot simply follow what the Code "says" ('states' actually, since it cannot speak!), because it doesn't make precise and unambiguous prescriptions which can be followed in a well defined manner. Therefore we do need to be pragmatic, though perhaps not quite so "stick it anywhere liberal" as Frank Krell suggests! Your insistence that an unpaginated online first version be denied availability is simply counterproductive and causes more problems than it solves.

Of course, what we actually need is a simple official declaration by the ICZN (perhaps just a couple of sentences) to the effect that metadata doesn't matter and clarifying that online first versions are to be considered available (provided that they are otherwise fully Code compliant). But can the ICZN be bothered?

Cheers,

Stephen

--------------------------------------------
On Wed, 27/1/16, John Noyes <j.noyes at nhm.ac.uk> wrote:

 Subject: RE: [Taxacom] Important note Re: two names online published - one new species
 To: "'Stephen Thorpe'" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>, "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>, "Laurent Raty" <l.raty at skynet.be>
 Received: Wednesday, 27 January, 2016, 10:28 PM
 
 Hi Stephen,
 
 I hate to bring this up again
 but there a good number of us (probably the majority of my  colleagues - certainly all the ones that I have talked to)  do not agree that an early view version is to be considered  available if it differs in any way (including metadata) from  the final published version. The fact that some of the most  vociferous of you say that metadata does not matter is  neither here nor there. It is still a big mess and nothing  is clear. If we have a code of zoological nomenclature we  must follow what it says not what someone says it is  supposed to say or should say. Hopefully these problems can  be ironed out satisfactorily and will ultimately not have  any serious impact on nomenclature, especially priority.
 
 John
 
 John Noyes
 Scientific
 Associate
 Department of Life Sciences
 Natural History Museum
 Cromwell
 Road
 South Kensington
 London
 SW7 5BD
 UK
 jsn at nhm.ac.uk
 Tel.: +44 (0) 207 942 5594
 Fax.: +44 (0) 207 942 5229
 
 Universal Chalcidoidea Database (everything you  wanted to know about chalcidoids and more):
 www.nhm.ac.uk/chalcidoids 
 
 
 -----Original Message-----
 From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu]
 On Behalf Of Stephen Thorpe
 Sent: 26 January
 2016 20:57
 To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu;
 Laurent Raty
 Subject: Re: [Taxacom]
 Important note Re: two names online published - one new  species
 
 Laurent,
 
 Once again you are mistaken,
 but that doesn't reflect badly on you, it reflects badly  on the the almost bewilderingly confusing way that the Code  has been written.
 
 As long
 as the early view file is considered to be the version of  record (with preregistration on ZooBank truly indicated  within), all that matters is that the PDF file for it  contains something which can be reasonably interpreted as a  date of publication. If the subsequent print edition is  different in any regard, this is irrelevant.
 
 So, in your example a
 statement "Systematic Entomology (2015) ..." in  the online edition contains a date of publication  (incompletely specified as 2015), so, all other things being  equal, is Code compliant. It is irrelevant what happens  after that. What is technically made available is the online  first PDF (which probably never gets archived, but actual  archiving isn't actually a Code requirement!)
 
 It is all a big mess but a few
 things are clear enough.
 
 Cheers,
 
 Stephen
 
 --------------------------------------------
 On Wed, 27/1/16, Laurent Raty <l.raty at skynet.be>
 wrote:
 
  Subject: Re:
 [Taxacom] Important note Re: two names online published -  one new species
  To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
  Received: Wednesday, 27 January, 2016, 9:30  AM
  
  Stephen,
  
  When an early view file
 issued
  in 2015 gets included in a 2016
 volumes,  an  original statement "Systematic  Entomology (2015), DOI:
  
 
 10.1111/syen.#####" (as in the
 
 yet-to-be-published file here: 
  http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/syen.12157/epdf
  ) is
  *changed* into a
 statement
  "Systematic Entomology
 (2016), 41, ##-##." 
  (as in this file:
 
  http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/syen.12142/epdf
  , which is
  registered in
 ZooBank as
  being published on 12 Aug 2015:
 
  http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoo
 
 bank.org:pub:38D703ED-127A-4DB0-8153-8D78AF4AC212
  ).
  
  The year
 that appears in
  this statement in the final
 file (the only one  that remains) is *not*, nor is even
 *intended*  to be, the year of  publication of the pdf  file that we are trying here to make  "published".
  
  It
 is the year of publication of the print  run.
  
  And of nothing
  else.
  
 
 Cheers, Laurent -
  
  
  On 01/26/2016 08:43 PM,
 
 Stephen Thorpe wrote:
  > Laurent,
  >
  
  >
 You
  are contrasting "in the work
 itself" with  "metadata", but this  >
 isnot  necessarily so. Remember that the concept of  "metadata", as used  > here,  didn't  exist when the Amendment was drafted. Zhang  just  >  subsequently pulled it out of a  hat in order to try to  save the  >  Amendment from objections relating to  "preliminary  versions". Anyway, if  > you  contrast  "in the work itself" instead with  "just on  the publisher's  > web page for  the  article, or elsewhere", then "Systematic  Entomology  > (2016), 41, 287–297"
  is "in the work itself". This seems
 like a  > reasonable and pragmatic interpretation to  make, which avoids this  > particular  problem.
  >
  >
 
 Cheers,
  >
  >
 Stephen
 
 _______________________________________________
  Taxacom Mailing List
  Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
  http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
  The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be  searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
  
  Celebrating 29 years of
  Taxacom in 2016.
 _______________________________________________
 Taxacom Mailing List
 Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be  searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
 
 Celebrating 29 years of
 Taxacom in 2016.
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org

Channeling Intellectual Exuberance for 29 years in 2016.


More information about the Taxacom mailing list