| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| 9 earlier messages | ||
| Doug Yanega | Feb 15, 2012 10:40 am | |
| Paul Kirk | Feb 15, 2012 10:51 am | |
| Roderic Page | Feb 15, 2012 11:23 am | |
| Armand Turpel | Feb 15, 2012 11:39 am | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 15, 2012 12:47 pm | |
| Jim Croft | Feb 15, 2012 1:06 pm | |
| Curtis Clark | Feb 15, 2012 5:49 pm | |
| Tony...@csiro.au | Feb 15, 2012 7:19 pm | |
| Roderic Page | Feb 15, 2012 10:18 pm | |
| Jim Croft | Feb 15, 2012 10:29 pm | |
| Armand Turpel | Feb 16, 2012 5:12 am | |
| Roderic Page | Feb 16, 2012 8:24 am | |
| Doug Yanega | Feb 16, 2012 9:45 am | |
| Chuck Miller | Feb 16, 2012 11:57 am | |
| Bradley Boyle | Feb 16, 2012 2:45 pm | |
| Richard Zander | Feb 16, 2012 3:10 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 16, 2012 3:24 pm | |
| Frederick W. Schueler | Feb 16, 2012 3:31 pm | |
| Chuck Miller | Feb 16, 2012 4:14 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 16, 2012 4:28 pm | |
| Chris Thompson | Feb 16, 2012 7:05 pm | |
| Kim van der Linde | Feb 16, 2012 7:13 pm | |
| Neal Evenhuis | Feb 16, 2012 7:27 pm | |
| Kim van der Linde | Feb 16, 2012 7:38 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 16, 2012 7:40 pm | |
| muscapaul | Feb 17, 2012 12:16 am | |
| Dr Brian Taylor | Feb 17, 2012 12:23 am | |
| Armand Turpel | Feb 17, 2012 1:25 am | |
| Chris Thompson | Feb 17, 2012 7:03 am | |
| Chris Thompson | Feb 17, 2012 11:23 am | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 17, 2012 1:09 pm | |
| Chris Thompson | Feb 17, 2012 2:04 pm | |
| Tony...@csiro.au | Feb 17, 2012 2:32 pm | |
| Richard Pyle | Feb 17, 2012 2:51 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 17, 2012 3:16 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 17, 2012 3:18 pm | |
| Richard Pyle | Feb 17, 2012 3:22 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 17, 2012 3:37 pm | |
| Richard Pyle | Feb 17, 2012 5:06 pm | |
| Tony...@csiro.au | Feb 17, 2012 5:18 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 17, 2012 5:27 pm | |
| Curtis Clark | Feb 17, 2012 7:39 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 17, 2012 8:04 pm | |
| Richard Zander | Feb 18, 2012 9:26 am | |
| Richard Zander | Feb 18, 2012 9:59 am | |
| Richard Pyle | Feb 18, 2012 11:33 am | |
| Curtis Clark | Feb 18, 2012 6:45 pm | |
| Richard Pyle | Feb 18, 2012 8:59 pm | |
| Paul van Rijckevorsel | Feb 19, 2012 12:36 am | |
| Roderic Page | Feb 19, 2012 5:48 am | |
| Paul van Rijckevorsel | Feb 19, 2012 7:36 am | |
| Roderic Page | Feb 19, 2012 8:09 am | |
| Paul van Rijckevorsel | Feb 19, 2012 8:58 am | |
| Curtis Clark | Feb 19, 2012 8:59 am | |
| Curtis Clark | Feb 19, 2012 9:49 am | |
| Frederick W. Schueler | Feb 19, 2012 10:29 am | |
| Richard Pyle | Feb 19, 2012 12:14 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 19, 2012 12:45 pm | |
| Bob Mesibov | Feb 19, 2012 2:23 pm | |
| Walker, Ken | Feb 19, 2012 2:36 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 19, 2012 2:38 pm | |
| Bob Mesibov | Feb 19, 2012 2:54 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 19, 2012 2:56 pm | |
| Walker, Ken | Feb 19, 2012 3:08 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 19, 2012 4:05 pm | |
| Bob Mesibov | Feb 19, 2012 4:07 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 19, 2012 4:38 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 19, 2012 5:09 pm | |
| Curtis Clark | Feb 19, 2012 5:18 pm | |
| Bob Mesibov | Feb 19, 2012 5:33 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 19, 2012 5:50 pm | |
| Kenneth Kinman | Feb 19, 2012 7:27 pm | |
| Weakley, Alan | Feb 19, 2012 7:47 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 19, 2012 7:50 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 19, 2012 7:52 pm | |
| Curtis Clark | Feb 19, 2012 8:13 pm | |
| Stephen Thorpe | Feb 19, 2012 8:22 pm | |
| Dr.B.J.Tindall | Feb 19, 2012 11:08 pm | |
| Paul van Rijckevorsel | Feb 19, 2012 11:52 pm | |
| Paul van Rijckevorsel | Feb 19, 2012 11:56 pm | |
| Richard Pyle | Feb 20, 2012 1:02 am | |
| Richard Pyle | Feb 20, 2012 1:24 am | |
| Richard Pyle | Feb 20, 2012 1:27 am | |
| Richard Pyle | Feb 20, 2012 1:32 am | |
| Paul van Rijckevorsel | Feb 20, 2012 3:07 am | |
| Curtis Clark | Feb 20, 2012 7:28 am | |
| Paul van Rijckevorsel | Feb 20, 2012 8:55 am | |
| Richard Pyle | Feb 20, 2012 9:07 am | |
| Paul van Rijckevorsel | Feb 20, 2012 9:40 am | |
| Richard Zander | Feb 20, 2012 10:35 am | |
| Wolfgang Lorenz | Feb 20, 2012 11:03 am | |
| Richard Pyle | Feb 20, 2012 11:09 am | |
| David Campbell | Feb 20, 2012 11:41 am | |
| Paul van Rijckevorsel | Feb 21, 2012 1:03 am | |
| Richard Pyle | Feb 21, 2012 8:26 am | |
| Francisco Welter-Schultes | Feb 21, 2012 8:48 am | |
| Paul van Rijckevorsel | Feb 22, 2012 12:30 am | |
| Paul van Rijckevorsel | Feb 22, 2012 12:44 am | |
| Adam Cotton | Feb 22, 2012 3:00 am | |
| Francisco Welter-Schultes | Feb 22, 2012 3:11 am | |
| 21 later messages | ||
| Subject: | Re: [Taxacom] validation of taxon names | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Roderic Page (r.p...@bio.gla.ac.uk) | |
| Date: | Feb 19, 2012 5:48:11 am | |
| List: | edu.ku.nhm.mailman.taxacom | |
This thread seems to have spiralled off into the murky waters of taxonomic
opinion, where no sane individual would want to go ;)
Dragging it back a bit, my list of five services I think would be useful were:
1. Is this a name? 2. Is this the correct way to write it? 3. Is this name currently in use? 4. What other names are related to this name (e.g., synonyms, lexical variants)? 5. Where was this name published? Can I see that publication?
I still think most of this is pretty straightforward to do. Number 3 could
perhaps be best phrased as "what name should I use?." As much as we might
dislike the question (there will often be multiple possible names, and some
argument about which to use), I suspect many uses don't care about these minor
details, they want a name to use for their purposes. As Robert Scoble has argued
in the context of buying a mobile phone, people want to make a choice that
avoids making them look stupid http://scobleizer.com/2011/12/26/phone7/
In the case of taxonomic names, I'm guessing people would like to use a name
that most of their readers are likely to recognise, and that search engines will
find. If I'm compiling a list of animals eaten by penguins I don't want the full
taxonomic history, nor do I want ambiguity, just give me a name!
There also seems to be an undercurrent of "this taxonomy stuff is really hard,
we can't automate this stuff because taxonomists have special knowledge, etc.".
There will always be hard cases that need expertise, but I suspect a lot of the
information users need can be computed. For example, Huber and Klump have done
some interesting work on using algorithms inspired by Google's PageRank to
analyse taxonomic synonomies (see
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2008.02.016 , free PDF here
http://edoc.gfz-potsdam.de/gfz/get/13007/0/d8b09c133462792c99eb6a163a6c5601/13007.pdf
).
So, I'd like to see less special pleading that taxonomy is hard, that taxonomic
knowledge is special, and more focus on what users want (or need), and how we
can create the tools they need.
Regards
Rod
--------------------------------------------------------- Roderic Page Professor of Taxonomy Institute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences Graham Kerr Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK
Email: r.p...@bio.gla.ac.uk Tel: +44 141 330 4778 Fax: +44 141 330 2792 AIM: rodp...@aim.com Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1112517192 Twitter: http://twitter.com/rdmpage Blog: http://iphylo.blogspot.com Home page: http://taxonomy.zoology.gla.ac.uk/rod/rod.html
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List Taxa...@mailman.nhm.ku.edu http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
methods:
(1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
(2) a Google search specified as: site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom
your search terms here





