[CPN] Publication-Related Issues

[Mike Keesey]

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 1:11 AM, Michel Laurin <michel.laurin at upmc.fr> wrote:
>
> The problem is that the Companion Volume (CV below, for short) is
> supposed to include the first established names under that code. If we
> drop this idea, what becomes of the CV?

Mike Taylor suggests that it be published after the code but that it
not have any special purpose under the code (no more than any other
publication that defines names). Really, he is questioning the very
need for a Companion Volume.

The initial impetus for the CV was to make sure that "major" clade
names were well-defined when the code was implemented. However, over
time the scope of the CV has diminished. Its primary purpose now seems
to be to provide examples of well-defined names. But the code already
serves this purpose (with one major difference: the examples in the
code are just examples, not established definitions).

Removing the CV as a requirement for implementing the code would
require changing Item 6 in the Preamble and Art. 7.1, linking the
implementation of the code to another date (e.g., the publication of
the code itself, or a specific date).

I'm not entirely sure I agree with Mike Taylor on everything, but I
think his points should be addressed. Can we defend continuing to link
the implementation of the code to the publication of the CV?

-- 
T. Michael Keesey
http://tmkeesey.net/