BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="l_raty" data-source="post: 3204308" data-attributes="member: 24811">It's a point of detail, but you cannot interpret "ö" (or "ø") in an OS as a "non-Latin character". Under this interpretation, the name is in breach of Art. 11.2 which strictly requires that all names use only the 26 letters of the Latin alphabet and, as a result, it is unavailable. If the name is to exist at all, "ö" or "ø" can only be interpreted as the Latin letter "o" in a modified form (which, as per the main guideline of principle, is to be returned to its "bare" unmodified form).Wikipedia is probably better not trusted blindly on this type of things, though. As witness the numerous corresponding original spellings that actually depart from 'holboell*': <a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/19563#page/159/mode/1up" target="_blank">Phoxus Holbölli Krøyer 1842</a>, <a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/19563#page/85/mode/1up" target="_blank">Lymnaea Holbölli Møller 1842</a>, <a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/19563#page/96/mode/1up" target="_blank">Fusus Holbölli Møller 1842</a>, <a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/19563#page/512/mode/1up" target="_blank">Cercops Holbölli Krøyer 1843</a>, <a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/19641#page/649/mode/1up" target="_blank">Ceratias Holbölli Krøyer 1845</a>...As Richard said: the Code is clear on this point.(Where it's not, as usual, is on prevailing usage rules, which H&M reject as impossible to apply objectively, and which some might probably view as having been violated here. Note that the suggestion on Zoonomen that a change towards "holboellii" was made in the Peters Check-list (ie., not before 1931), and then followed blindly by ia. AOU, is not correct: this spelling was already used quite consistently in America back in the late 19th C., having appeared at a time when James Lee Peters was not even born yet; eg. <a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/15998#page/135/mode/1up" target="_blank">Coues 1882</a>; <a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/49563#page/439/mode/1up" target="_blank">Baird, Brewer & Ridgway 1884</a>; <a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/16484#page/87/mode/1up" target="_blank">AOU 1886</a>, <a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/17080#page/7/mode/1up" target="_blank">AOU 1889</a>, <a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/47624#page/17/mode/1up" target="_blank">AOU 1895</a>, <a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/48603#page/34/mode/1up" target="_blank">AOU 1910</a>. Peters just followed what was already a long established usage in his time.)<a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/107142#page/202/mode/1up" target="_blank">French wording</a> (for Richard <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" />): "32.5.2.1. En cas de présence d'un signe diacritique ou autre, la correction consiste en la suppression de ce signe. Par exception, dans les noms dérivés de l'allemand publiés avant 1985, l'umlaut sur une voyelle est à remplacer par un "e" inséré à la suite de cette voyelle; ceci s'applique même s'il y a un doute sur l'origine allemande du nom."(My translation: "32.5.2.1. In case of presence of a diacritic or other mark, the correction consists in the removal of this mark. By way of exception, in names derived from German published before 1985, the umlaut on a vowel is to be replaced with an "e" inserted after this vowel; this applies even if there is a doubt on the German origin of the name.")(1985 is when the third edition of the Code came in force: the exception was discontinued as from that edition, presumably with the aim of making rules applying to new names more simple; but it was retained for older names, presumably to avoid a wave of unnecessary "corrections".)Note also <a href="http://biodiversitylibrary.org/item/107142#page/74/mode/1up" target="_blank">the example associated to 32.5.2.1</a>: "nuñezi is corrected to nunezi, and mjøbergi to mjobergi, but mülleri (published before 1985) is corrected to muelleri." Why should Holböll alt. Holbøll receive a treatment different from that of Mjøberg alt. Mjöberg?</blockquote>

Verification