[Taxacom] Formation of family names e.g. Diplogasteridae vs. Diplogastridae in Nematoda (and similar)

[Stephen Thorpe]

>It is, and must be, implicit that assessment of usage applies to the date the 4th Edition was published - prior, but not subsequent.<

Holy sh!t! Wow, that really should have been explicit! Maybe it is just your way of reinterpreting the article so that it isn't worthless?

--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 3/11/15, Doug Yanega <dyanega at ucr.edu> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Formation of family names e.g. Diplogasteridae vs. Diplogastridae in Nematoda (and similar)
 To: "Sven Kullander" <Sven.Kullander at nrm.se>, "taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
 Received: Tuesday, 3 November, 2015, 12:57 PM
 
 On 11/2/15 2:51 PM, Sven
 Kullander wrote:
 > Article 29.5 says
 "is in prevailing usage". It does not say
 "was in prevailing usage in 2000".  Prevailing
 usage had to be assessed based on most recent usage
 frequency by current/most recent specialists, not at a
 specific point back in time, which would be counter to the
 idea of prevailing usage as a best estimate of current
 adoption of a name (even if such adoption may have been
 initiated long ago) by specialists on the group.
 >
 It is, and must be,
 implicit that assessment of usage applies to the 
 date the 4th Edition was published - prior, but
 not subsequent. Any 
 other interpretation
 would render this and all similar Articles 
 *absolutely worthless*. Consider this
 scenario:
 
 Prior to 2000, 5
 authors use spelling A. In 2000, when the new Code 
 comes out, one of these authors cites spelling
 A, and points out that it 
 is in prevailing
 usage, and therefore must be maintained under 29.5. In 
 2005, a different author claims that they
 believe spelling B is correct, 
 and
 convinces 9 other authors to use spelling B in 2006. This
 violates 
 Article 29.5, and if we accepted
 it, it would switch the spelling from A 
 to
 B (10>5). If 10 more authors then came out in 2009 and
 published 
 using spelling A, the spelling
 would switch back to A (15>10). If 15 
 more authors then published in 2012 using
 spelling B, it would switch 
 back to B again
 (25>15). It could therefore flip flop back and forth 
 FOREVER, which is about as unstable as you
 could possibly get.
 
 Clearly, the Article is NOT intended to allow
 spelling to change back 
 and forth
 indefinitely based solely on who has swung the pendulum in
 
 their favor most recently. All of the
 Articles invoking prevailing usage 
 MUST
 have a date beyond which the assessment stops, or ALL of
 them could 
 be easily circumvented by simply
 out-publishing one's competitors. The 
 Code is intended to STOP the arguments, not
 prolong them into infinity.
 
 Peace,
 
 -- 
 Doug
 Yanega      Dept. of Entomology   
    Entomology Research Museum
 Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0314 
    skype: dyanega
 phone: (951)
 827-4315 (disclaimer: opinions are mine, not UCR's)
               http://cache.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html
    "There are some enterprises
 in which a careful disorderliness
      
    is the true method" - Herman Melville,
 Moby Dick, Chap. 82
 
 _______________________________________________
 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 28 years of
 Taxacom in 2015.