Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Steve Sorrell's avatar

The IMA has a lot to answer for. They periodically change the rules. Then change them back. Then change them again, etc. If bindheimite is in fact, a valid species, then (in my limited understanding), the name maybe should have stayed put. The approach to naming oxyplumboanythingite, and any other groups where these types of "rules" apply, sometimes leaves pre-existing names, and only uses the new nomenclature for newly described minerals. Except when it doesn't! And then of course, the earliest name should apply (again, sometimes!) where there are more than one, so it could (should?) be bleinierite?

Expand full comment
Cora & Scott Helm's avatar

Love the history and language lessons woven into your posts!

Expand full comment
2 more comments...

No posts