Message 2005-12-0022: Re: Multiple definitions? was Re: Stormbergia dangershoeki

Mon, 10 Oct 2005 23:43:45 +0200 (MEST)

[Previous by date - Re: Multiple definitions? was Re: Stormbergia dangershoeki]
[Next by date - =3D?ISO-8859-1?Q?Re:_Stormbergia_dangershoeki,_new_Early_Jurassic_or=]
[Previous by subject - Re: Multiple definitions? was Re: Stormbergia dangershoeki]
[Next by subject - Re: My classification of coelurosaurs]

Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 23:43:45 +0200 (MEST)
From: [unknown]
Subject: Re: Multiple definitions? was Re: Stormbergia dangershoeki

> --- Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht ---
> Von: "Jaime A. Headden" <>
> Datum: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 13:42:41 -0700 (PDT)
> David Marjanovic ( wrote:
> <The ISPN or CPN will need to invite _lots_ of authors to contribut=
e to
> the Companion Volume, even those who don't plan to use phylogenetic
> nomenclature*, to make sure that we get names and definitions
> a) that as many people as possible (!) will be able to live with,
> and b) that will not collapse under
> their own weight within the next 20 or 30 years ( least).>
>   Then you have the partisanship to consider: Will I or will I not
> include someone I am opposed to? Will I coin the name myself and pu=
> it in without anyone else knowing? Will I toss a definition out bec=
> I think the name should be different? Will I put my own naming theo=
> to practice to edit the submissions? Will I use this opportunity to
> "fix" centuries of problems like "Ceratopsia" into "Ceratopia" or
> simply do away with *Ceratops* altogether and use "Triceratopsia"?
> Will I invite only my friends to the party, or can
> know-nothing-BUT-up-and-coming students be allowed to contribute?

The worst-case scenario -- and judging from my limited knowledge it i=
entirely possible -- is that the Companion Volume will be compiled in=
_exactly this way_.

(Explanation for outsiders -- *Ceratops* is probably a nomen dubium, =
many higher taxa are named after it [in an apparently grammatically=
incorrect fashion], of which most have been in common use for over 10=

> perhaps the definitions and name applications will resemble somethi=
> like a platypus (everything works together, but does it work with
> everything else?)


Ingenious metaphor!

> A name, after all, is just a name, though the scent still as sweet.

Not when you need to relearn it all the time, and especially not if=
different people use different names for the same taxa and vice versa=
Stable definitions are worth a lot. It will not be possible to forese=
e all=20
problems, so it is a good thing that the Committee can a posteriori e=
names and definitions if requested, but both the Companion Volume and=
subsequent practice should strive to reduce the Committee's workload,=
only because size, time and working speed of the Committee are limite=

Highspeed-Freiheit. Bei GMX superg=FCnstig, z.B. GMX DSL_Cityflat,
DSL-Flatrate f=FCr nur 4,99 Euro/Monat*


Feedback to <> is welcome!