[r-t] Anything Goes vs Peals Mean Something

[Mark Davies]

RAS writes,

> So please put your cards on the table.  If you want to prescribe how 
> changes of stage are allowed, let's see the proposal.

OK, here's the latest. I don't know, you might like this!

A peal is true if:

1. It is rung on one stage, and each change in the extent at  this stage is
rung either N or N+1 times in the peal, and no more, for N>=0.

2. It is rung on two stages, A and B, where |B-A|=1, and each change in the
extent on A is rung M times in the peal, and no more, and each change in the
extent on B is rung N or N+1 times, and no more, for M>0 and N>0.

3. In a two-stage peal, the structure of the composition should make clear 
which changes are treated at which stage.

4. For the purposes of proof in (1) and (2) above, methods at any lower
stage may be considered rung at a higher stage by: (a) including leading or
covering bells; (b) ringing two or more methods at a lower stage in
parallel; or (c) both of the above.

How's point (3) for you? Allows the half-lead spliced... allows anything 
that can be reasonably justified by the composer.

MBD