Message 2004-10-0196: Article 5

Sun, 31 Oct 2004 21:13:46 +0100

[Previous by date - Death of the PhyloCode?]
[Next by date - Re: Article 5]
[Previous by subject - Article 11.8]
[Next by subject - Articles 19 & 20, Table 1, Appendix A]

Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 21:13:46 +0100
From: [unknown]
To: PML <>
Subject: Article 5

Article 5 establishes what the date of publication is. It fails to re=
however, how it should be interpreted when a publication just bears a=
or even just a year as the date.
        Often a day is given somewhere in such publications; for exam=
the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 20(4) says "December 2000" thr=
the issue, but "19 January 2001" on the title page, so it is clear th=
at 19=20
January 2001 would be the publication date. But what if there's no su=
        I think the preexisting codes have rules that interpret these=
 as the=20
first, 15th or last day of the month or year. I think we should intro=
some rule along these lines.

Current full text of Article 5:
5.1. The publication date is the date on which publication, as define=
d in=20
Article 4, took place. More specifically, it is the date on which the=
publisher or publisher's agent delivered the printed matter to a carr=
ier for=20
distribution to the public. In the absence of proof establishing some=
date, the one appearing in the publication itself must be accepted as=

5.2. When separates are issued in advance of the work (periodical or =
that contains them, the date of the work, not of the separate, consti=
the date of publication.


Feedback to <> is welcome!