Fair enough. > On May 25, 2017, at 11:30 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 25 May 2017, Gaelan Steele wrote: >> That format looks fine, although it would be nice if you listed the rule >> number to apply the implication to. >> (Is that the citations?) > > Would putting a symbol next to a rule in Citations be sufficient and not-too > hard to scrape (to keep things compact > for humans). e.g. > > CITATIONS > R101/23(*), R234/42, CFJ 4566 > > with the understanding that the (*) might not always be there, not all > implications map to a specific rule. > > >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
