Proposal: [Core] Bold & other kinds of text in the Ruleset
Self-killed. Failed by card.
Adminned at 05 May 2017 16:17:27 UTC
Add to “Clarifications” in “Appendix” a subsection called “Quality of Life”.
Within it, add:
The Ruleset’s text may contain typographical emphasis, as aesthetic enhancements for ease of use of the Ruleset. Such additions are part of the ruletext itself, but grant no additional formal meaning, because they are mere decorations. These enhancements are:
• Bold, such as in the following example: Blognomic.
• Italics, such as in the following example: Blognomic.
• Colors.The combination of the color blue plus italics, as typographical emphasis, is to be used to insert “comments” into the Ruleset. Comments hold no formal commanding power in the Ruleset, but may contain additional information or pointers for ease of use.
Consider all preexisting typographical emphasis in the Ruleset which have been added by previous legal methods to be legal as well.
If the bold text in the rules aren’t part of the rules, they can be removed by “If the Ruleset does not properly reflect all legal changes that have been made to it, any Manager may update it to do so.”. And if they ARE part of the rules, there is actually nothing in the rules that acknowledge that they exist, assuming that the rules are plaintext by default, like Agora’s or several others (which I believe is a fairly natural intuition to have).
So either way, we need to acknowledge that they’re actually part of the Ruleset (and consequently, what nature they have), even if it seems pretty obvious. And if not, this is precisely a clarification to go into the “Clarification” section anyways.
Also, comments, because it should prove to as useful as comments in coding, especially for intense inter-dynastic stuff (such as the imperatives fix).
Crumb:
This seems completely unnecessary.