<html><head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252"></head><body>
<div style="">
<div>Dear CPN members,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In the absence of any more comments, I am calling for a vote on slightly modified versions of the two sets of proposed code changes I sent you on Sept. 6. The only difference between the attached versions and the Sept. 6 ones is that David M's corrections
of typos, formatting, etc. have been incorporated. Kevin and I also agree with his recommendation that "node" be retained in the glossary, and that Note 9.7.1 be modified to say that an apomorphy-based definition necessarily identifies a clade provided that
there is only one internal specifier. Those changes from the Sept. 6 proposals are also incorporated in the attached document PhyloCode4c2.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I interpret David M's and Brian's comments as a YES vote on the attached versions, unless they tell me otherwise. Everyone else, please vote by this Friday (Sept. 20) by responding to all.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Phil</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div style="">
<div style="">
<div id="x__com_1" class="x_msocomtxt"></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div style=""></div>
<div style=""><br>
<div><br>
<div>Begin forwarded message:</div>
<br class="x_Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="margin-top:0px; margin-right:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px">
<span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium"><b>From: </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium">"Cantino, Philip" <<a href="mailto:cantino@ohio.edu">cantino@ohio.edu</a>><br>
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top:0px; margin-right:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px">
<span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium"><b>Subject: </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium"><b>Re: [CPN] two new sets of changes to consider</b><br>
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top:0px; margin-right:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px">
<span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium"><b>Date: </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium">September 13, 2013 4:08:04 PM EDT<br>
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top:0px; margin-right:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px">
<span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium"><b>To: </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium">Committee on Phylogenetic Nomenclature <<a href="mailto:cpn@listserv.ohio.edu">cpn@listserv.ohio.edu</a>><br>
</span></div>
<br>
<div>Thank you, David M, for a very careful reading of the proposals. I have corrected the various formatting errors, typos, and missing dates that David pointed out. (Incidentally, I agree with his "pet peeve" about the period belonging inside the parentheses,
but I overlooked it in the spot he pointed out.)<br>
<br>
I will correct the references to various examples of Art. 11.13 if the CPN votes to approve the revision of Art. 11.12-11.14 that you have been considering this week. Most of David's other suggested changes are not directly related to this set of proposals,
so we can delay their consideration until after voting on the current proposals.<br>
<br>
Two points in David's message are relevant to the current set of proposals: deletion of the definition of "node" from the glossary, and clarification of a point he raised about Note 9.7.1. I sent my recommendation on these two items to Kevin a few minutes
ago and am awaiting his reply. <br>
<br>
Today was the tentative deadline for comments. If you intend to comment on the proposals I sent last Friday, please either do so today or request an extension. If I do not hear from anyone by the end of the day, I will call for a vote as soon as Kevin and
I decide how we want to address the two issues David raised.<br>
<br>
Phil<br>
<br>
<br>
On Sep 11, 2013, at 5:47 PM, David Marjanovic wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">I am attaching two sets of proposed changes for your consideration (one of them in two forms--one showing the changes using Track Changes and the other with the changes accepted for ease of reading). The shorter document (Art. 11.12-11.14)
deals with qualifying clauses and other mechanisms that can be used to restrict the application of a name with respect to particular hypotheses of relationship or clade composition.<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Art. 11.12, Example 1: In the 4th-to-last line there's "*Multelidae*" instead of *Mustelidae*.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Art. 11.13, Example 3: The year of *Podocarpus macrophyllus* (Thunberg) Sweet is missing.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Pet peeve alert: At the very end, put the period in front of the closing parenthesis. When you put a whole sentence into parentheses, put the whole sentence, including the period at its end, into parentheses.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Otherwise, I approve.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">The other attached document consists of nearly the entire code This draft (version 4c2) consists of the current (posted online in 2010) PhyloCode version 4c (excluding the Preface and Index) with the addition of modifications approved
by the CPN in a series of votes between September 2012 and August 5, 2013.<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">I approve of all changes except the deletion of "node" from the glossary; I have not systematically looked for uncorrected cross-references.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">There's an extra period between Principles 5 and 6.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">In Principle 6, I'd like to propose replacing "a given" by "any particular".<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Note 6.1A1 states that italicizing all taxon names is not consistent with the ICZN. The passage of the ICZN that says only genus and species names should be italicized, however, is "only" General Recommendation 6: "6. The scientific
names of genus- or species-group taxa should be printed in a type-face (font) different from that used in the text; such names are usually printed in italics, which should not be used for names of higher taxa. Species¬group names always begin with a lower-case
letter, and when cited should always be preceded by a generic name (or an abbreviation of one); names of all supraspecific taxa begin with an upper-case (capital) letter."
<a href="http://www.nhm.ac.uk/hosted-sites/iczn/code/includes/page.jsp?nfv=&booksection=appendixB">
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/hosted-sites/iczn/code/includes/page.jsp?nfv=&booksection=appendixB</a><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Note 9.5.2: "Art. 11.12, example 5", which does not currently exist, will become Art. 11.13, Example 1 under the other proposal.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Note 9.6.1: "Art. 11.12, Example 4", which does not currently exist, will become Art. 11.13, Example 2 under the other proposal.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Note 9.7.1: "An apomorphy-based definition as described in Art. 9.7 necessarily identifies a clade" only if it has only one internal specifier.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Art. 9.8: Note 9.8.1 should be indented twice to make clear that the bulleted examples below it belong directly to the Article, not to the Note, and that the Note refers specifically to the example above it. In the first example after
the Note, "Art. 11.12, Example 3" will become Art. 11.13, Example 2 under the other proposal. I'm confused now, because "Art. 11.12, Example 4" must correspond to the same Example...<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Art. 9.9: In the second example, "Art. 11.12, Example 3" will become Art. 11.13, Example 2 under the other proposal.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Art. 9.10: Replace "Art. 9.10," by "Art. 9.10.".<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Art. 17.1: I propose deleting "foreign to classical Latin". Not only is it unnecessary, but – I think we had that discussion a few years ago – there is a diacritical sign that was used in Classical Latin, even in stone inscriptions:
<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apex_%28diacritic%29">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apex_%28diacritic%29</a><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Art. 17.5, taken literally, appears to contradict Art. 17.1 and 17.2.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Art. 20: Two Examples use "2010"; that's over...<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">Glossary: The term "node" is still used in the glossary entries for "branch" and "phylogenetic tree", and in the footnote to Art. 9.5 (and 9.6).<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">_______________________________________________<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">CPN mailing list<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><a href="mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu">CPN@listserv.ohio.edu</a><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><a href="http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn">http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn</a><br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</body></html>