question for the ornithologists

["James Farlow" <farlow@ipfw.edu>]

Both HANZAB and Birds of the Western Palearctic, in their species descriptions, 
frequently report the lengths of digits I, II and IV as percentages of the 
lengths of digit III.  Nice.

Am I correct in assuming that these lengths are of the fleshy parts of the toes 
only, excluding the claws?  I didn't see an explicit statement to that effect 
in HANZAB, but the cassowary data make little sense otherwise. Thus in the 
description of _Casuarius casuarius_ (p. 66, "structure"), it is reported that 
the inner toe (II) is c. 60 % of the length of the middle toe (III).  this 
would make little sense if the toe lengths included the claws.