Message 2000-10-0004: Re: Aesthetic Note (semi-humorous)

Thu, 05 Oct 2000 19:51:38 -0400

[Previous by date - Aesthetic Note (semi-humorous)]
[Next by date - Re: Aesthetic Note (semi-humorous)]
[Previous by subject - Re: Addendum 4: Conversion of generic epithets]
[Next by subject - Re: Aesthetic Note (semi-humorous)]

Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 19:51:38 -0400
From: Kevin de Queiroz <Dequeiroz.Kevin@NMNH.SI.EDU>
Subject: Re: Aesthetic Note (semi-humorous)

Not really.  There's nothing wrong with ranks as long as they have nothing =
to do with the meanings of names.  And what makes you think that  the =
ranks in the organization of the PhyloCode are absolute?  It would hardly =
compromise the PhyloCode if the Articles were called Rules, the Sections =
called Chapters, etc.  Sorry about the nit picking, but it's been a long =
day. =20

>>> "T. Mike Keesey" <> - 10/5/00 7:39 PM >>>
I was just looking at the PhyloCode Table of Contents when I was suddenly
struck by how it's organized: Articles within Sections within Chapters
within Divisions ... kind of against the spirit of taxonomy without
absolute ranks, isn't it? :)

Sorry --

 Home Page               <>
  The Dinosauricon        <>
   personal                <> --> <>
    work, binary files      <>
     Dinosauricon-related    <>
      AOL Instant Messenger   <Ric Blayze>
       ICQ                     <77314901>
        Yahoo! Messenger        <Mighty Odinn>


Feedback to <> is welcome!