Re: [dinosaur] is Lisowicia an available name?

[David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>]

This is a good question with no answer: the Code nowhere mentions supplementary 
information â there is no hint as to whether supp. inf. of a properly 
published paper should be considered part of the paper (and thus published) or 
not. Somebody should ask the Commission to make a Declaration (assuming they 
still aren't working on the next version of the Code; I've been told the 
current one was only expected to last 10 years or so, not 20 and counting).

The PhyloCode is explicit, BTW: supp. inf. is not published, and anything 
necessary for a nomenclatural act must not be placed there. But the PhyloCode 
doesn't govern *Lisowicia*.