[Previous by date - Re: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms]
[Next by date - Re: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms]
[Previous by subject - Re: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms]
[Next by subject - Re: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms]
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 10:12:41 -0700 (PDT)
From: [unknown]
To: Mailing List - PhyloCode <phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu>
Subject: Re: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms
--- jonathan.r.wagner@mail.utexas.edu wrote:
> In the never-ending search for a way to appease everyone concerning=
panstems,
> here's a combination of the proposals recently made regarding panst=
ems. This
> system would allow users of the pantstem convention to use pan- nam=
es
> unreservedly without placing those names in competition for priorit=
y with
> historically used names (the "Rule 10A problem"). It is largely bas=
ed on
> Cannatella's suggestion at the Paris meeting,with some additions in=
spired by
> the recent discussion. I apologize if I have pilfered ideas from ot=
hers
> uncredited... I haven't been able to keep up with recent posts.
[snipped]
I think that's a great idea. It accomplishes the goal of having "Pan-=
" clades
even better than having to individually define each one, and is not d=
isruptive
with prior usages.
I may be getting ahead of things here, but it would also be a good wa=
y to
define other types of taxonomic entities besides clades, should the c=
ode ever
come around to covering them as well. For example:
Non-; prefix; Non-S =3D {x \in Organisms | x =AC\in S} | S \in Clades
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D> T. Michael Keesey <http://dino.lm.com/contact>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D> The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D> Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=09=09
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail=20