[Previous by date - Re: PhyloCode]
[Next by date - Re: PhyloCode]
[Previous by subject - Re: PhyloCode]
[Next by subject - Re: PhyloCode]
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 00:00:18 +0100
From: [unknown]
To: PML <phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu>
Subject: Re: PhyloCode
> If PhyloCode becomes adopted then the ISPN would be able to exert s= o much > influence on all dictionary publishers in the world since when it c= omes to > the scientific definitions they would be dependent on the official > pronouncements of the scientific community and either accept or rej= ect=20 > them > as being in usage but they could not invent their own. Do you expect that on January 1, 200n, the Linnaean system will immed= iately=20 evaporate, without a fight? I _hope_ that by then more _professional= =20 systematic biologists_ will have _heard_ of PN than not. I do think y= ou will=20 be right -- in (n + 20). Or perhaps as soon as in (n + 10), but that = must be=20 doubted.=20