[Taxacom] How important is italicisation, when writing taxon names on web pages?

[Gerwin Kasperek]

Not directly a justification that Italics for species names are  
acceptable, but a recommendation on their use from relevant authority  
will be found in the following book:
Council of Science Editors (2014): "Scientific Style and Format - The  
CSE Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers, Eighth Edition"
https://www.scientificstyleandformat.org/Home.html

Regards
Gerwin Kasperek



Quoting Andy Mabbett via Taxacom <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>:

> I was always taught to write species, subspecies, and genus names in
> italics, in print and online.
>
> Some time ago, I persuaded the Guardian newspaper to update their
> style guide to include this [1] - something that they mostly, but not
> always [2], do now.
>
> I recently asked the UK government to update their online style guide
> similarly, and they refused, saying:
>
>
> #~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#
>
> "A lot of the GOV.UK style guide decisions are based on:
>
>      * accessibility
>      * evidence and user research into how people read online
>
> "For example, some evidence suggests that people with dyslexia find
> italics difficult to read as it can make the text appear to run
> together and cause crowding. It's important that GOV.UK content is
> accessible to everyone, so you shouldn't see italics used across
> GOV.UK.
>
> "However, our style guide isn't set in stone - with enough relevant
> evidence and user-research we can take suggestions for updates to our
> style team here. If you feel that you might be able to provide some
> evidence to support a change, let us know and we can run it past our
> team here."
>
> #~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#~#
>
> How important an issue do you think such italicisation is?
>
> Is it more important on pages about taxonomy than, say, news reporting
> aimed at the general public?
>
> My understanding on accessibility is that italicised paragraphs or
> long sentences should be avoided, but single words (for emphasis) or
> species names, are OK. Can anyone give sources to support this? LInks
> to prior discussion would also be welcome.
>
>
> [1] https://www.theguardian.com/guardian-observer-style-guide-s
>
> [2] e.g.  
> https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/oct/28/human-species-homo-bodoensis-who-lived-500000-years-ago-is-named
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:  
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at:  
> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:  
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years, 1987-2021.