No subject

when it contains a specific unique combination of one-to-three Protonyms,
candidates 1-6, plus 9 and 11 would be considered separate "Names", with the
others (7, 8, 10, 12) treated as orthographic variants (stored in the
"AppliedName" element  in the context of a Concept/usage of my proposed
Nominal-Concept-based version of the schema).

Finally, from the perspective of TCS, I gather all 12 of these candidates
would be considered separate "Names" in the sense that each one would be
represented by a separate Original Concept (and corresponding Nominal
Concept).  Correct?

So, in summary, we have at least four ways to define what constitutes a
distinct "Name" entity/object:

A. Name=Protonym
(Zoological perspective; 4 distinct "Names" represented, the others
representing alternative usage contexts and spelling variations).

B. Name=GenusProtonym+TerminalEpithetProtonym combination
(Botanical perspective(?); 6 distinct "Names" represented, the others
representing alternative usage contexts and orthographic variations).

C. Name=Unique Set of One-to-Three Protonyms
(Botanical perspective(?); 8 distinct "Names" represented, the others
representing alternative orthographic variations).

D. Name=Character string [as appears in association with a concept
definition]
(TCS perspective; 12 distinct "Names" represented).

If I'm not mistaken, I think that option "D" would also consider the
following 4 examples to be additional distinct Names, each with their own
Original Concept:

13) Aus (Xus) aus L.
14) Aus (Xus) bea Archer
15) Aus (Xus) beus Archer
16) Aus (Xus) aus L. beus Archer

Correct?

My first choice would be to go with option "A", and my second choice would
be to go with option "C".  My reasons are not based on Codes of
Nomenclature, but rather on consistency of logic and normalization, and
heavier reliance on intra-dataset cross-referencing, assuming we end up with
some sort of "Names as Objects" implementation (either as top-level objects,
or anchored to Nominal Concept objects, or anchored to Original Concept
objects).

Am I the only one who feels that settling down on (agreeing to) a single
answer to this question (What constitutes a unique "Name"?) is of critical
importance for the design and implementation of the TCS/LC schema?

Aloha,
Rich

Richard L. Pyle, PhD
Database Coordinator for Natural Sciences
Department of Natural Sciences, Bishop Museum
1525 Bernice St., Honolulu, HI 96817
Ph: (808)848-4115, Fax: (808)847-8252
email: deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
http://www.bishopmuseum.org/bishop/HBS/pylerichard.html