Taxacom: Dates of e-pubs ahead of print?

[Richard Pyle]

I just read through all the commentary here, and I think this post from Thomas addresses the various questions most succinctly.  To commemorate the point I make in the "P.S." below, I'll add a few comments to help clarify things (because I deal with this stuff on a near-daily basis). Keep in mind that the following applies to the current (Fourth Edition) of the ICZN Code, as Amended in 2012 (e.g., see: doi:10.3897/zookeys.219.3944).

1) Any name proposed before 1 January 2012 can only be made available within a work published on physical paper (Art. 8.5.1)
2) In reality, any name proposed before 4 September 2012 can only be made available within a work published on physical paper (the date the Amendment was published, and the date on which the version of ZooBank that supported all requirements was publicly released).
3) Any name or nomenclatural act appearing in an electronic document can only be made available if the requirements of Art. 8 are fulfilled, and none of the provisions of Art. 9 apply.  The requirements specific to electronic works include:
	a) The work itself must state the date of publication. Most people interpret this as a "date" at any level of precision (even if just the year, and even if just the year in the form of a copyright statement) (Art. 8.5.2).
	b) The work must be registered in the ICZN Official Register (i.e., ZooBank).  Registration of names has always been optional in the current active edition of the Code (Art. 8.5.3)
	c) The work itself must contain evidence of registration. Examples of evidence include the registration number of the work, or the exact date of registration of the work, the registration number of a name within the registered work, and perhaps other things as well. The registration of an Author of the work does not count as evidence.  The evidence may be formatted in a way that is visible to humans in the electronic document, or it may be embedded in some non-visible way (e.g., in the electronic document metadata, or as an embedded hyperlink within the electronic document). (Art. 8.5.3)
	d) The ZooBank record must indicate an online archive for which the electronic copy of the work is intended to be deposited. This must be selected from among the "approved" online archives listed on the ZooBank "About" page.  This can either be applied to the specific work itself, or to the "parent" work (Journal, series, book, etc. to which the registered work is linked). The electronic work does NOT have to actually be deposited in the archive -- the only requirement is that the intended archive be indicated in ZooBank. (Art. 8.5.3.1)
	e) The electronic document must exist in a manner that preserves the content and layout. (Art. 8.5.3.1)
	f) The ZooBank record must indicate an ISSN for the journal or series in which a work is published, or an ISBN of a book or volume in which a work is published. (Art. 8.5.3.2)
[Note that items a, c, and e above apply to the electronic work itself; whereas items b, d & f, apply to the ZooBank registration record.]
4) An electronic document is considered to be published in the sense of the Code at the moment that all of the requirements listed above are fulfilled, provided the work does not fall afoul of any provision of Art. 9.
5) There is ambiguity in the Code concerning Art. 9.9 as to what represents "preliminary versions of a work accessible electronically in advance of publication".  I have never seen a clear example of this.  The Article itself is circular, in the sense that it essentially says, "A work cannot be published before it is published."  I know Frank and others like to use the term "Version of Record" or similar terms, but these terms have no meaning in the sense of the Code.  I am not aware of any aspect of the Code that would clarify when Art 9.9 would actually apply.
6) As noted by Francisco and Thomas and others, the term "nomen nudum" means different things to different people. By struct definition in the Code, the term does not apply to names that fail to appear in works that are considered published in the sense of the Code.  In my interpretation, any name proposed in electronic form (e.g., PDF) in a well-regarded, peer-reviewed journal with full documentation in all respects except that it fails to fulfill one or more of the requirements of publications, should be treated exactly the same as someone writing an email to a colleague that says "I think we should call our new species Aus xus, and designate the specimen in my collection in Honolulu as the holotype, because it differs from all other species in having an "x"-shaped spot on it."  In both cases, the name is not published in the sense of the Code -- and therefore does not exist in the sense of the Code.  Neither is a nomen nudum; it's just that neither exists from the perspective of the Code.
7) In cases where a work containing a new name or act exists both electronically and in paper form, the date of publication is the earliest date on which either form fulfilled the Code requirements for publication (Art. 21.9).
8) In cases where date of either a paper-published work, or electronic work is uncertain, the other provisions of Art. 21 apply.

I think that covers all the points I wanted to emphasize; but I may have missed some.  I think part of Victor Fet's original question is addressed in #7 above, in conjunction with the points made in #5, and other requirements in the list above.,

Aloha,
Rich

P.S. I began writing this email almost exactly at midnight UTC on 4 September 2022 -- so I literally starting typing within a minute of the exact tenth Anniversary of the era of electronic publication under ICZN.  So... Happy tenth anniversary, everyone!

Richard L. Pyle, PhD
Senior Curator of Ichthyology | Director of XCoRE
Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum
1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, HI 96817-2704
Office: (808) 848-4115;  Fax: (808) 847-8252
eMail: deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
BishopMuseum.org
Our Mission: Bishop Museum inspires our community and visitors through the exploration and celebration of the extraordinary history, culture, and environment of Hawaiʻi and the Pacific.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at lists.ku.edu> On Behalf Of Thomas Pape via
> Taxacom
> Sent: Saturday, September 3, 2022 11:42 AM
> To: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: Taxacom: Dates of e-pubs ahead of print?
> 
> We have two issues here, non-compliant works and non-compliant names.
> 
> When a scientific work is published, the work may:
>        (1a) be in compliance with ICZN Article 8 and not excluded by Art. 9, and the
> work has then been published for the purposes of zoological nomenclature
>        (1b) not be in compliance with ICZN Article 8 (or be excluded by Art. 9), and
> the work is outside zoological nomenclature
> 
> A name proposed in a work deemed not to have been published for the
> purposes of zoological nomenclature is not regulated by the Code.
> Such a name is an unpublished name and will fall outside of the terminology
> applied to names published in the meaning of the Code. As explained by
> Francisco.
> 
> This is a technicality stemming from how terms are defined, but it is practical to
> classify works as being either inside (and with content regulated by) or outside
> (and with content not regulated by) the existing legislation.
> 
> Names that are published [for the purposes of zoological nomenclature] after
> 1930 but fails to conform to Art. 13 are nomina nuda.
> Names published [for the purposes of zoological nomenclature] after 1999 and
> complying with Art. 13 but not complying with Article 16 are "unavailable".
> 
> /Thomas
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at lists.ku.edu> On Behalf Of Adam Cotton via
> Taxacom
> Sent: 3. september 2022 22:06
> To: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: Taxacom: Dates of e-pubs ahead of print?
> 
> On 04/09/2022 02:53, Francisco Welter-Schultes via Taxacom wrote:
> >
> > A name that qualifies for being a nomen nudum must be published in the
> > sense of the Code.
> >
> > Glossary:
> > nomen nudum (pl. nomina nuda), n. A Latin term referring to a name
> > that, if published before 1931, fails to conform to Art. 12; or, if
> > published after 1930, fails to conform to Art. 13. A nomen nudum is
> > not an available name, and therefore the same name may be made
> > available later for the same or a different concept; in such a case it
> > would take authorship and date [Arts. 50, 21] from that act of
> > establishment, not from any earlier publication as a nomen nudum.
> >
> > In short words, a nomen nudum is a published new name that was not
> > equipped with a description.
> >
> > This is too brief, because a description can be substituted by
> > something else, but this is the idea behind.
> >
> > Best wishes
> > Francisco
>  >
>  >
>  >
> 
> 
> Francisco,
> 
> What status do you give to names published after 1999 but not complying with
> Article 16? I would also treat these as nomina nuda.
> 
> Adam.
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> 
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu For list
> information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.ku%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C9ad54c4430634f41394508da8e0d40e7%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637978484984956352%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=HQfl87AjDQev2cnobJHooVjQ09b6tdSfrOEbzaz%2BKls%3D&reserved=0.
> edu%2Flistinfo%2Ftaxacom&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%
> 7C7daf09fb011c409c86f208da8df5255d%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3
> c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637978381278571590%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJ
> WIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C
> 3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=aAfWVXnBvNh75iYgngOSSgoR7vhyxWMcWbQf
> AzcZqWY%3D&reserved=0
> You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu The
> Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxaco
> m.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C7daf
> 09fb011c409c86f208da8df5255d%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7
> C0%7C0%7C637978381278571590%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoi
> MC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000
> %7C%7C%7C&sdata=biUiv1MmofkwzxuXd%2FZ%2FLxueC60g%2BP0aeJIU
> NjbD5VI%3D&reserved=0
> 
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 35 years, 1987-2022.
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> 
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu For list
> information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu The
> Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C9ad54c4430634f41394508da8e0d40e7%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637978484984956352%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ttPJ0Pfq4Z8bhjYYhCu7smMQrtauuLprg2JE5Z2WcqM%3D&reserved=0
> 
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 35 years, 1987-2022.