Hi Tom and others,

>The only thing we would need that could be
>a bit tough would be a review process to try and ensure our information
>was good and we just didn't jump on a published change without some
>expert head nods.

Well, there's the rub--and it's a major one. And that is why the COA Lambis
Group (I had to go look it up) was put in charge. And we need to continue
to work through them.

I have extensive (but not user-friendly) lists of corrections for many
publications covering Muricidae, Mitridae, Costellariidae,
Coralliophilidae, Volutidae, Pectinidae, and Cardiidae. But these also
cover synonymy--which may not be errata nor worthy of correction. I am
quite confident about Muricidae (largely based on Emily Vokes' work),
Mitridae/Costellariidae (based on Richard Salisbury' s papers and personal
correspondence) and Volutidae (based on Patrice Bail's personal
communications). Cardiidae are probably in pretty good shape also based on
recent papers. As for Pectinidae and Coralliophilidae--forget anything
authoritative.

I would like to find a pen-pal to discuss Coralliophilidae synonymy; is
there anyone out there?

At 07:16 AM 7/14/99 -0600, you wrote:
>John,
>
>I sort of remember a discussion about compiling corrections, but it's
>very hazy.  If you have some stuff, maybe that is the beginning we
>need.  I would be willing to compile the various inputs into a usable
>format to be published by the "American Conchologist Magazine" (if Lynn
>Scheu agrees), or listed on the COA web page (if the web master agrees),
>or my own club web page (heck, I'll agree), or someone else's, or
>whatever.  I think this is critical information and it would be nice to
>get it out to any and all shellers (making the web media the best and
>most flexible alternative).  The only thing we would need that could be
>a bit tough would be a review process to try and ensure our information
>was good and we just didn't jump on a published change without some
>expert head nods.  I think we have plenty of Conch-L members who could
>fill that role or know someone who could fill that role.  We would make
>sure to publish the fact that it was an informal list and no one was
>hanging their reputation on the correctness of it -- while at the same
>time trying our best to keep it current and as correct as possible.
>Changes would be dated so anyone using the list would know if something
>had been added or deleted since their last perusal.
>
>What do you think?
>
>Tom Eichhorst in New Mexico, USA
>
>John Wolff wrote:
>>
>> Back in September 1997, there was a discussion that the Conch-L group
>> (name?) would publish errata for popular books on the Web. Someone (?) was
>> assigned to do it, and I offered to accumulate the information.
>
>
John Wolff
2640 Breezewood Dr.
Lancaster, PA 17601, U.S.A.