[Zoobank-list] RE: ZooBank Data Objects

[Chris Lyal]

Hi Rich,
 
> This definition is based on
>the idea that, for the vast majority of taxonomic literature, authors treat
>each "basionym" (see asterisked note below) in one particular way, and can
>therefore be regarded as a single "usage instance".  If, in a publication,
>the name "Aus bus" is used consistently four times on page 4, and 2 times on
>page 8 and again in a table on page 9, I would not think of that as 7
>discrete usage instances; but rather as one usage instance, representing the
>treatment of a name within the context of a specific unit of documentation
>instance (e.g., a publication).
 
Up to a point, probably; the only nagging thought I have here is that in some works the author will be discussing / interpreting previous usages of a name, so part of the text will refer to the current author's usage instance, whilst the name elsewhere in the text will refer to his interpretation (or repetition) of someone else's usage instance.  This may be getting into such obscure detail that we can never hope to parse out and interpret the context, but it does become fairly apparent in catalogues, for example, where one might wish to resolve the 'same' name in different directions, depending on which publication is being cited as its origin.  I guess that in all cases we have to look at cost/benefit of applying a GUID (or a placeholder for one).  
 
Cheers,
Chris

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

-------------- next part --------------
Hi Rich,
 
> This definition is based on
>the idea that, for the vast majority of taxonomic literature, authors treat
>each "basionym" (see asterisked note below) in one particular way, and can
>therefore be regarded as a single "usage instance".  If, in a publication,
>the name "Aus bus" is used consistently four times on page 4, and 2 times on
>page 8 and again in a table on page 9, I would not think of that as 7
>discrete usage instances; but rather as one usage instance, representing the
>treatment of a name within the context of a specific unit of documentation
>instance (e.g., a publication).
 
Up to a point, probably; the only nagging thought I have here is that in some works the author will be discussing / interpreting previous usages of a name, so part of the text will refer to the current author's usage instance, whilst the name elsewhere in the text will refer to his interpretation (or repetition) of someone else's usage instance.  This may be getting into such obscure detail that we can never hope to parse out and interpret the context, but it does become fairly apparent in catalogues, for example, where one might wish to resolve the 'same' name in different directions, depending on which publication is being cited as its origin.  I guess that in all cases we have to look at cost/benefit of applying a GUID (or a placeholder for one).  
 
Cheers,
Chris

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