[CPN] ratification of the PhyloCode

[Cantino, Philip]

Dear CPN members,

I like Michel’s suggestion.  We will send the CPN the preface later to review separately.  In the meanwhile, the CPN can be reading the body of the code while we finish writing the preface.

Phil


> On Nov 16, 2018, at 4:12 AM, Michel LAURIN <michel.laurin at mnhn.fr> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I am delighted to learn that the Code is nearly ready and also support the idea of voting on the body of the text soon. However, could we be given a chance to read, and eventually suggest minor changes to the preface and approve it separately, later? I think that this would be best, and it should take much less time than for the rest of the text.
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Michel
> 
> ----- Mail d’origine -----
> De: Adl, Sina <sina.adl at usask.ca>
> À: Cantino, Philip <cantino at ohio.edu>, Committee on Phylogenetic Nomenclature <cpn at listserv.ohio.edu>
> Cc: Max Langer <mclanger at ffclrp.usp.br>
> Envoyé: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 23:06:07 +0100 (CET)
> Objet: Re: [CPN] ratification of the PhyloCode
> 
> Thank you Phil for this encouraging update. Yes I am happy to vote on it without the preface. Sina
> 
>     Sina Adl     Professor
>     Department of Soil Sciences
>     College of Agriculture and Bioresources
>     University of Saskatchewan
>     (306) 966-6866
>     agbio.usask.ca
> 
> Editor-in-Chief, Rhizosphere
> http://www.journals.elsevier.com/rhizosphere/ 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CPN <cpn-bounces at listserv.ohio.edu> On Behalf Of Cantino, Philip
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2018 15:17
> To: Committee on Phylogenetic Nomenclature <cpn at listserv.ohio.edu>
> Cc: Max Langer <mclanger at ffclrp.usp.br>
> Subject: [CPN] ratification of the PhyloCode
> 
> Dear CPN members,
> 
> Kevin and I are approaching completion of the PhyloCode and are hoping to submit the manuscript to CRC Press before the end of 2018.  According to Article 22.3 of the code, "the CPN has the responsibility and power to ratify the first edition of the code prior to its implementation.”  Through the many drafts and versions of the code, all parts of it have been approved at least once by the CPN, but the code as a whole should be ratified by the CPN before the manuscript is sent to CRC.  
> 
> At this point, the main body of the code (including preamble, principles, rules, recommendations, notes, appendices, and glossary) is finished and could be submitted to the CPN for ratification.  The only parts that are not done are the preface and index, neither one of which affects how the code functions.  In order to expedite submission of the manuscript, Kevin and I suggest that the CPN review the completed body of the code while we continue to work on the preface (the index will be prepared by CRC Press, after which we will check it).  My question to you is this: Are you willing to vote on ratification of the code without seeing the preface, or do you want to wait until we have the entire manuscript (including the preface but not the index) assembled before reviewing and voting on it?  
> 
> Phil
> _______________________________________________
> CPN mailing list
> CPN at listserv.ohio.edu
> http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn
> _______________________________________________
> CPN mailing list
> CPN at listserv.ohio.edu
> http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn
> 
> -- 
> Michel Laurin
> CR2P, UMR 7207
> Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle
> Bâtiment de Géologie
> Case postale 48
> 43 rue Buffon
> F-75231 Paris cedex 05
> FRANCE 
> http://www2.mnhn.fr/hdt203/info/laurin.php
> E-mail: michel.laurin at mnhn.fr