new "coded" classifications (clarifications)

[Tom DiBenedetto]

Ken Kinman wrote:

>      But first to answer Tom's questions.  A simple "pectinate"
>cladistic classification, 1(2(3(4))), one would simply number from 1 to
>4.
>      If 2 and 3 split off as a branch and are sister groups, the coding
>would be 1, 2, B, 3.

Sorry, but this is not clear. What happened to 4?  What does B represent? And your example with Proteobacteracea
doesnt help, because I dont know what branching pattern you are intending to represent. Let us keep this simple
and use an example that everyone is familiar with. The relationships of  extant Amniota are (in cladistic indented
form);
        Amniota
                Reptiles
                        Turtles
                        Saurids
                                Lepidosaurs
                                Archosaurs
                                        Crocs
                                        Birds
                Mammals
                        Monotremes
                        Therians
                                Marsupials
                                Placentals
How would you represent this in your classification system? No need to use fancy latin names; I just want to see the
logic of the representation.