On Mon, 27 Oct 2008, Ian Kelly wrote: > This compound method isn't one of the methods listed in R1728(a). The > paragraph does say "at least one of the following methods", but I > think that just means that the rules can define multiple methods for > performing the same dependent action, not that an otherwise undefined > composite of multiple methods is allowed as a single method.
I don't see why a compound of two listed methods isn't a clear extension of a double requirement. -G.
