On Aug 24, 2011, at 12:22 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: > > 0-, 40-50 becomes 0-
> 0-499, 400-599 becomes 0-599 > 1000-1075, 200-250, 1051-1100 becomes 1000-1100, 200-250 This goes against Roy's recommendation to 416 overlaps… But I do see that an overlap is specifically noted in an example Until we are *clear* on what we should be doing, spec-wise, I think it's unwise to make assumptions… From the above, I would be more comfortable with 0-, 40-50 ---> 0- 0-499, 400-599 ---> 0-599 1000-1075, 1025-1088, 200-250, 1051-1100 --> 1000-1088, 200-250, 1051-1100 that it, merge as we can, but never resort...
