On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Ben Caplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Replace paragraph c) with the following: > > c) Exactly one recordkeepor who tracks instances of that switch. > > i) If the type of switch's backing document is an instrument, > then the switch's recordkeepor must be an officer in order > for the switch definition to be effective. That officer's > report includes the value of each instance of that switch > whose value is not its default value, or which has no > default value. > > ii) Otherwise, the switch's recordkeepor must be a party to > the type of switch's backing document in order for the > switch definition to be effective. The recordkeepor SHALL > weekly publish the value of each instance of that switch > whose value is not its default value, or which has no > default value.
There must be some way of making this cleaner. > Insert the following paragraph before the final paragraph: > > If an instance of a switch would otherwise have its default > value, but no default value is defined for that type of switch, > then the instance instead comes to have a random value from > among the possible values for that type of switch. How is the random determination made? It would be much cleaner to continue requiring a default value, I think. > Insert the following paragraph after the final paragraph: > > A constant switch is a type of switch defined as such by that > type of switch's backing document. An instance of a constant > switch CANNOT be flipped. Unnecessary. Switches can only be flipped where a mechanism for doing so is explicitly defined. -root
