Oops, I was going to submit some gratuitous arguments, and I plumb forgot. To be honest, I'm tired of griping about this anyway, so I don't think that I'll bother.
> a) Should Rule 754 (3)'s "primarily used in ... legal contexts" be > interpreted as "primarily used by Agora in legal contexts", or > "primarily used by the English-speaking population in general in > legal contexts"? In the former case, Rule 754 (3) applies; in > the latter, it does not. I think it's quite clear which of these is meant by R754(3). > b) If Rule 754 (3) does not apply, then should Rule 754 (4)'s > "ordinary-language meaning" be interpreted as "primary > ordinary-language meaning", or "whichever ordinary-language > meaning is most appropriate according to other standards"? In > the latter case, is "legal person" sufficiently common to be > classified as an ordinary-language meaning, albeit not the > primary one? Meh. Works for me. -root
