[CPN] Proposed revisions of Article 11

[Cantino, Philip]

Dear CPN members,

It has been more than a month since we last discussed the set of proposed changes in the PhyloCode that we have been intermittently discussing and sequentially voting on since September.  To remind you about the most recent installment of this saga, Kevin and I sent the CPN a set of proposed changes on Oct. 24.  These changes were approved, but David Marjanovic (see his Nov. 6 email) pointed out some serious ramifications of item 9 (concerning Art. 11), which led us to reconsider it.  The following set of changes is intended to reduce the frequency of the sort of problem David pointed out with his fish example, and to provide a mechanism to address such problems when they arise.  In the process of drafting these revisions of Art. 11, we have also proposed strengthening the way the code deals with the use of non-type specimens as specifiers, changing former Rec. 11.4A from a recommendation to a rule.

Before calling for vote, let's give ourselves a little time to discuss these new proposals.  Please send your comments by the end of next week (Friday, Jan. 11).  If anyone feels this is insufficient time for discussion before voting, please say so.

Phil




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserv.ohio.edu/pipermail/cpn/attachments/20130102/72af2b53/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Art 11_revisions.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 34816 bytes
Desc: Art 11_revisions.doc
Url : http://listserv.ohio.edu/pipermail/cpn/attachments/20130102/72af2b53/attachment-0001.doc