[CPN] proposed revisions of Note 9.3.1: call for a vote

[David Marjanovic]

I have to run now; I retract my vote for the time being because of the 
following points and will vote later today.

> I am sorry that I did not have  time to look at this text earlier. I
 > have problems with the formulation for apomorphy-based clades, in
 > which "synapomorphic with" was omitted of some kinds of allowed
 > definitions. This is a mistake in my opinion because it leaves
 > ambiguity; often, convergent apomorphies are indistinguishable from
 > synapomorphic ones. So "synapomorphic" MUST be present in such kinds
 > of definitions.

I need to check.

> The removal of minimal and  maximal clades defined based on extinct
 > taxa is a big mistake, in my opinion.

I think they aren't outlawed even by implication, but I have to check 
that, too.