Susan wrote:
You said "As to the classification IPNI is a nomenclatural database,
which means they
are listing botanical names, and a botanical name never has more than
three
parts (so Tillandsia usneoides var conspecta f. longissima is not a
name,
but a classification)."

I've never heard that a botanical name can have no more than 3 parts --
where did you find that information? I don't *think* it's in the code
that way.

IPNI designed their database so that no name would have more than 3
parts. Personally, I don't see how a 4-part name is "A Classification"
and a 3-part name isn't.

Susan, new to the group (well, I was here before google took them over)
PhD student in Botany

Forgive an ignorant philosopher, but a name is not a classification. It
denotes a taxon, perhaps, which is the outcome of classification, but the
classification lies in relating taxa, not in the act of naming.

A small nit, but I had to pick it.

--
John S. Wilkins, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Biohumanities Project
University of Queensland - Blog: evolvethought.blogspot.com
Who are you going to believe? Me, or your own eyes?