[Previous by date - The starting phase of the PhyloCode and other issues]
[Next by date - Re: The starting phase of the PhyloCode and other issues]
[Previous by subject - Re: The Pancompromise?]
[Next by subject - Re: The starting phase of the PhyloCode and other issues]
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 18:06:15 -0500 (EST)
From: "T. Mike Keesey" <tmk@dinosauricon.com>
To: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
Cc: phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu
Subject: Re: The starting phase of the PhyloCode and other issues
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, David Marjanovic wrote:
> Why is Article 17.1. so restrictive? I suggest to treat all
> diacritical signs like diaereses in Note 17.1.1. Today, scientific
> names come from languages around the globe, for most of which Latin
> respectively English simply hasn't got enough letters. Why not allow
> Cha=F1aresuchus, U=F1enlagia or Gracilisuchus stipanicicorum?
> (Optimistically assuming that your mail reader programs can read
> this... :-] )
Mine doesn't, and I think that is a small part of the answer....
> Or tone marks on Chinese names?
I doubt any of ours could read that.
I think the article is a good one. Allowing diacritical marks could lead
to confusion. (Suppose two names were identical except that one had a
grave over an 'a'? Even worse, if one had a grave and another had an acute
mark?) Sticking to 26 distinct letters also allows for easier typesetting
and, as we've seen here, electronic communication.
___________________________________________________________________________=
__
T. MICHAEL KEESEY
Home Page <http://dinosauricon.com/keesey>
The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com>
personal <keesey@bigfoot.com> --> <tmk@dinosauricon.com>
Dinosauricon-related <dinosaur@dinosauricon.com>
AOL Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze>
ICQ <77314901>
Yahoo! Messenger <Mighty Odinn>