It seems to me that DNA encodes for proteins, not for traits.
Yes we all know that and it's a trivial point in this context.
How traits emerge is a far more complex story, and shouldn't be considered semiosis (IMO).
But it's obviously what the creationist argument is about. If you want to propose another term, fine, but
semiosis seems to me to be quite appropriate. Chemical coding that produces a salt or a protein is obviously not the concern, but how one gets from the chemical product to the traits of the living organism -- that is obviously another order of coding that has no chemical or biological explanation and IMO can't have one.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.