Robert  wrote:

[On Phylocode]
> Questions: What is the current stance of the scientific community on this
> proposal? Does anyone know of any official or unofficial statements on this
> project from professional socities and/or journals?

Most systematists I have spoken to on this reject it, including ardent
cladists, on the grounds that the current ad hoc classification scheme
stores and retrieves information about the organisms that a straight
cladistic one doesn't (but that cladistic classification is a natural
one, rather than one of convenience). The boosters for it include the
originators and one philosopher (Ereshevsky) - nobody else seems all
that keen.

An impressionistic viewpoint only, though. Time will tell. Try the
journals Cladistics or Systematic Biology for discussion.
-- 
John Wilkins - wilkins.id.au
[I]magine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, "...interesting
hole I find myself in - fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? ...
must have been made to have me in it." Douglas Adams, Salmon of Doubt
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 8/22/03 6:37:37 AM