PhyloCode: The real problem...again

[Richard Jensen]

Here is a quote from the Phylocode Conference announcement:

    "We hope that this meeting and the publication of the symposium volume will
be key events in the history of
    systematics. Indeed, they will mark the introduction of a new international
code of biological
    nomenclature that incorporates the most fundamental changes in the way taxon
names are defined
    since Linnaeus."

The sentiments expressed here are not those of a group who wish to propose
something as a trial.  My reading of papers and e-mail by and from phylocode
proponents is that they are set on a complete overthrow of the current rules of
nomenclature (IC_N standards).  Perhaps some phylocode proponents will let us
know if they are willing to view their proposed implementation as a simple trial
to see whether or not it gains favor as an alternative system..

Dick

Dipteryx wrote:

> + + +
> Could somebody please explain why implementation itself would be such a bad
> idea?
>
> It seems to me that at this stage the PhyloCode remains academic.
> Implementation might show if the PhyloCode is feasible at all and will not
> collapse under its own weight.
>
> For a trial to work it would be preferable if:
> - the resulting names would be clearly marked as being PhyloCode names (not
> just by capitalization or the lack of it) but by a clear symbol,
> - these names are used in the designated field (phylogenetic literature)
> only and not elsewhere
> - less noise was made about the (supposed) merits of the PhyloCode
>
> Paul van Rijckevorsel
> Utrecht, NL

--
Richard J. Jensen              | tel: 574-284-4674
Department of Biology      | fax: 574-284-4716
Saint Mary's College         | e-mail: rjensen at saintmarys.edu
Notre Dame, IN 46556    | http://www.saintmarys.edu/~rjensen