coppro wrote: > 6. NEED NOT: Failing to perform the described action does not > violate the rule in question.
Note that this has a similar quirk to MAY. Consider: Rule 5001, Power=1: X MAY NOT Y. Rule 5002, Power=2: X MAY Y. Rule 5003, Power=1: X SHALL Z. Rule 5004, Power=2: X NEED NOT Z. In each pair, the Power=2 rule fails to take precedence, because the formal definitions don't conflict in the way that the ordinary-language definitions would. (Fixing this would require amending MAY and NEED NOT by replacing "does not violate the rule in question" with "does not violate the rules". I'm pretty sure I proposed this for MAY a while back, but don't remember what happened.)
