[Previous by date - Article 5]
[Next by date - Re: Article 5]
[Previous by subject - Re: Article 11.8]
[Next by subject - Re: Article 5]
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 19:05:53 -0500
From: [unknown]
To: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
Cc: phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu
Subject: Re: Article 5
David, This is a good suggestion, which I will take up with Kevin. Article= =20 21 of the ICZN provides a model. Phil >Article 5 establishes what the date of publication is. It fails to= =20 >regulate, however, how it should be interpreted when a publication= =20 >just bears a month or even just a year as the date. > Often a day is given somewhere in such publications; for= =20 >example, the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 20(4) says "December= =20 >2000" throughout the issue, but "19 January 2001" on the title page,= =20 >so it is clear that 19 January 2001 would be the publication date.= =20 >But what if there's no such indication? > I think the preexisting codes have rules that interpret thes= e=20 >as the first, 15th or last day of the month or year. I think we=20 >should introduce some rule along these lines. > >Current full text of Article 5: >>> >5.1. The publication date is the date on which publication, as=20 >defined in Article 4, took place. More specifically, it is the date= =20 >on which the publisher or publisher's agent delivered the printed= =20 >matter to a carrier for distribution to the public. In the absence= =20 >of proof establishing some other date, the one appearing in the=20 >publication itself must be accepted as correct. > >5.2. When separates are issued in advance of the work (periodical or= =20 >book) that contains them, the date of the work, not of the separate,= =20 >constitutes the date of publication. ><< --=20 Philip D. Cantino Professor and Associate Chair Department of Environmental and Plant Biology Ohio University Athens, OH 45701-2979 U.S.A. Phone: (740) 593-1128; 593-1126 Fax: (740) 593-1130 e-mail: cantino@ohio.edu