On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 8:00 PM, Ed Murphy <[email protected]> wrote:
> Proposal: Fix MMI > (AI = 3, please) > > [Currently, the following hypothetical case: > > Rule A: X MAY Y. > Rule B: X MAY NOT Y. > > expands to > > Rule A: X doing Y does not violate Rule A. > Rule B: X doing Y violates Rule B. > > which don't conflict with each other, so B effectively wins. This > proposal changes the expansions to > > Rule A: X doing Y does not violate the rules. > Rule B: X doing Y violates Rule B. > > thus forcing a conflict, which is then resolved via precedence > as usual.] > > Amend Rule 2152 (Mother, May I?) by replacing this text: > > 5. MAY: Performing the described action does not violate the > rule in question. > > with this text: > > 5. MAY: Performing the described action does not violate the > rules. > Hmm...I think the rules are balanced towards MAY NOT for a reason. -- --Rodlen
