[Zoobank-list] quality control, "the real challenge", etc.

[Richard Pyle]

Hi Martin,

> The main advantages of my proposal are the following:
> (1) It requires the least amount of effort by all involved -
> need I stress that this is VERY significant in times of the
> taxonomist community and its material support base thinning
> almost as fast as the ozone layer?
>
> (2) It requires zoologists at large to adapt to the relatively
> smallest change from the current system, giving us the relatively
> largest chance for widespread acceptance of mandatory registration
> - "the real challenge", as I hope all of us agree.
>
> Since in my 'scenario' the publication realm and its peer-review
> system would be largely unaffected by the addition of ZooBank
> registration, truly open registry review would bring a significant
> net gain of quality control without obstructing progress toward
> our overall goals by erecting unnecessary additional formal hurdles.

Can you describe the specific differences between your proposal, and the one
that has been championed by Frank Krell (i.e., "Scenario 1", as described on
pp. 3-5 of the ZooBank "technical" article:
http://www.iczn.org/new%20ZooBank.htm)?

One difference that you have already confirmed for me is that, whereas
Scenario 1 (I believe) conceals the registration entry from public view
until after the original description has been published and is submitted to
and validated by ICZN, your scenario would make the registration entry
publicly visible (for comment and review) before the name is formally
published by traditional (paper) methods.

Are there any other differences between your scenario and scenario 1 with
regard to new names published after 200x? (Note that issues related to
retrospectively registered names established prior to 200x is another topic,
outside the scope of the "three scenarios" for new names.)

For example, does your scenario allow for registration *after* formal
publication (as Scenario 1 does)? Also, would your scenario require
validation of formal publication by ICZN of registered names, before they
are deemed available (as Sceanrio 1 does)?

Aloha,
Rich

P.S. Minor correction to your point 1 above:  actually scenario 2 requires
the least amount of effort by all involved.