[Zoobank-list] PR's 'pit bull' takes on open access

[Jim Mallet]

Open access is clearly an ideal which we should work towards, and many of 
us agree.  I think that this is surely the future for any issues of naming 
of organisms.  However, it was clear from this exchange that mandatory open 
access will not immediately be acceptable to zoologists generally or to 
taxonomists in other fields (botany, for example), because it entails a 
restriction on means of publication, and as an outsider I have to say I do 
understand that.

What Zoobank could, but has so far singularly failed to do, is to provide a 
well-resourced, secure, online means of registration of new names that will 
(most probably) be maintained into the future.  This is what Genbank 
succeeded in doing for genes and DNA sequences, on a purely voluntary 
basis. So what's the problem with a similar, voluntary solution for 
Zoological names?

Providing that the voluntary registration site was a success, de facto 
adhesion to the standard would undoubtedly follow and become de rigeur, or 
at least a social norm, of its own accord, and, maybe sometime in the 
future, might even be voted in as a mandatory ruling of the Code.

Let us remember that the Code itself is essentially voluntary, so the idea 
of making a particular form of registration or description mandatory is 
unnecessary and redundant.  I accept that the existing ICZN code has 
mandatory rules (but these have been agreed upon by the community), but of 
course this has no legal basis, and so the whole code itself is of course 
voluntary.  However, given that a mandatory requirement for open access is 
going to be controversial for the foreseeable future, why not go for a 
voluntary solution at least temporarily, and then see how things go?  Once 
the voluntary site has sorted out its many likely difficulties, then the 
decision to make the registration/description on the site mandatory can be 
evaluated with more objectivity.  For instance, depending on its success!

Immediate open access is viable today, provided the requirement is 
voluntary, and with no amendment of any code.  I can 99% guarantee that a 
properly set up site will get the ball rolling. The only question is: who's 
going to do the work and spend the money to provide the appropriate 
site?  The fact that this mailing list and the ICZN mailing list are able 
to exist suggests that we could start this site right now, with little 
extra cost.

Sincerely, Jim Mallet

James Mallet
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/taxome/jim/


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.