[blml] Single Authoritative Source

[Nigel]

[Richard Hills]
>> If my preferred chronological order rule was
>> part of the Scope,
[Grattan Endicott]
> +=+ It seems to me that any such material should come as 
> a recommendation rather than as a Law. It is not for me to
> say, but since Ton Kooijman is no doubt reading this thread 
> he may perhaps opt to include it as a subject for the appendix 
> he will devise as illustrations of the application of the laws. 

[nige1]
I feel strongly that if Richard Hills' rule is worth implementing, it 
should be incorporated in the law-book itself.

I welcome illustrations of how the law should be applied, especially 
in borderline contexts.

Nevertheless, I feel that the law-book should itself be as complete as 
possible.

A frequent question in Bridge discussion groups is "Where do I find 
information on <some obscure law, regulation, or interpretation>".

That is an indictment of the system. I am sure that Bridge rule-makers 
aren't really jealous and secretive about the rules of our game; but 
they often give that impression.

This is ridiculous state if affairs when the solution is so simple and 
obvious.

There is no sensible reason to leave gaps in a rule-book to be 
completed by local legislatures. Even in controversial areas, the 
law-book can provide *defaults*, which local legislatures are given 
explicit permission to over-ride.

If the WBFLC wants to change or clarify a Bridge rule, it can edit the 
WBF master web edition rule-book itself rather than bury its 
deliberations in obscure minutes, commentaries and interpretations. 
Changes would be highlighted, in place; and a list of dated 
modifications would be appended to the law-book (Like Ton's examples).

Similarly, if a local legislature insists on changing the WBFLC 
version, it can edit a local web version of the complete WBFLC 
rule-book, clearly marking and recording such changes.

The local legislature would be responsible for keeping the local 
version synchronised with changes to the global WBFLC edition.

If unnecessary rules were scrapped and the remaining rules made as 
simple and clear as possible, then a single local rule-book would save 
rain-forests of trees compared with current libraries of laws, 
regulations, interpretations, minutes, and so on.

Thus, players and directors would have a single complete authoritative 
local source of Bridge-Rules.