Re: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Proposal

["Glotmorf" <glotmorf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 5/30/02 at 1:37 AM Dan Waldron wrote:

>> And did you want to throw in as part of your definitions a reference
>> to an online dictionary?
>
>It's probably better not to.  But I might be able to redo the definitions
>in better way or change the terminology.  Suggestions?

That wasn't the point.  Thing is, there've been a few instances recently where a particular term used in the rules didn't have an explicit definition in the rules, but had a dictionary definition that could be reasonably applied to the situation.  Seeing as how we've probably got at least a hundred words that we rely on in the rules that we don't explicitly define, I'd like to see some sort of standard policy.  So far it's been decided on a case-by-case basis, which means "it's not defined in the rules" has been acceptable for some words but not for others.

						Glotmorf