{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015553199010250972, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011311417462000707, 'mean_word_length': 4.871369294605809, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
International Stratigraphic Guide, 1976

This volume contains what is worth preserving from a long international exercise. The Editor, Hollis D. Hedberg as Chairman of the International Subcommission of Stratigraphic Classification (ISSC), by a prodigious circulation of papers and more or less correspondence has involved a large international body of stratigraphers. Successive drafts for a single volume then developed and by the time of the International Geological Congress in 1972 the first published report was issued for discussion and criticism. In the succeeding years a smaller body (Editorial Committee) enlarged that first report to produce this Guide. It is difficult to see how that same body could make further radical revisions; the Guide is, therefore, a fitting conclusion at least to this phase. The occasion marks approximately the retirement of Hedberg after very many years as Chairman of the Subcommission. Progress towards an international consensus is manifest in this Guide. However, the definiteness of the statements without qualification as to what is widely agreed and what is controversial may give a somewhat false impression of unanimity. There is, moreover, an implication that because so much is a matter of opinion the more who agree with any particular opinion the better it is (e.g. when a National Committee agrees to accept the ISSC Conventions it is regarded as a matter for congratulation). However, there are some matters not just of convention but of principle and practice and if any part of the 1976 statement were to be misconceived then more agreement with that part is not a step forward. It is known that there is criticism of the volume in several quarters but it is not known how far the separate criticisms are compatible with each other because they have not been fully examined. However, even unanimous criticism would not itself settle any matter. So it is better to follow the Editor and regard the book as a published document for critical examination. It was on that basis that the massive vote in favour of publication was achieved. The essentials of the 1976 Guide were already presented in the more compact 1972 publication and the interval has allowed some minor revision and more detail to be filled in. Those who found the 1972 statement to their liking will favour this revision, which is a clear improvement. On the other hand, many of the objections made to the 1972 statement have not been met. The 1976 Guide adopts the same essential concepts as previously. The Editor explains the policy not to take into account major criticisms because they could hardly be summarized satisfactorily. Readers are referred to the immense bibliography for alternative views. This is probably a wise decision; but it follows that the volume necessarily gives a partial view.