[Previous by date - Article 11 (and 13, and 17, and 18)]
[Next by date - Fwd: Article 11 (and 13, and 17, and 18)]
[Previous by subject - Article 5]
[Next by subject - Benton's paper]
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:54:17 +0200
From: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
To: PML <phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu>
Subject: Articles 19 & 20, Table 1, Appendix A
Why does Art. 19.3 exist? And doesn't Art. 20.5 contradict it?
Table 1 mentions the BioCode. This draft is, or at least once was, online in
its entirety, at a URL which I don't remember.
And under "Synonymy and homonymy", it spells "heterodefinitonal".
:o)
Perhaps add a disclaimer to Appendix A that you won't sell people's
addresses and phone numbers >:o)
App. A II 2: Why is it mandatory to mention the code which governs a species
name when a species is used as a specifier but not when a type specimen is
used as a specifier?
App. A II 3 can be deleted in this edition.