Abstract
In the recent years, it has been debated whether the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature should be cited as ‘Anonymous’ or as having an ‘author’, i.e. the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. This question is addressed here, starting with the meaning of the term ‘anonymous’ in common language as well as in the Glossary of the Code: in both cases, it designates a work which does not contain, in its original edition, any information about the name(s) of the person(s) responsible for its authorship. A collective body like the Commission is not a person, and therefore not eligible as an ‘author’ in the sense of the Glossary of the Code. The Code is a text that provides Rules for the regulation of zoological nomenclature, and the format of bibliographic references in publications is not a matter of nomenclature but of editorial policy, and therefore out the scope of the Code. It is suggested that a flexible attitude be adopted. This question should be left at the discretion of authors and editors and the Code should not interfere with it. Several possible formats for the citation of the Code are presented. This paper also proposes a distinction between two categories of ‘anonymous’ works.