[r-t] Pick and mix rules

[Mark Davies]

RAS writes,

> Well, I can't pick any of your rules because I fundemetanlly disagree with
> your basic definitions.

OK, rewrite the basic definitions to be a bit better, then. I think you
particularly like disagreeing with me. Of course I can understand that. ;-)

> I'm not sure I like the beginning and ending in rounds bit, but I'll let
> that pass.

Yes, I don't think it actually has much impact on the rest of the
pick-and-mix stuff. It means "round block", really - something starting and 
finishing in the same place.

>> A touch is true if every change is unique.
> But I can't let that pass.  Under this definition a 240 of Grandsire
> Doubles is necessarily false.  This is a far to restrictive a definition
> of truth.

Just different words - I am currently only talking about proof of peals, and
a "touch" is simply a subset of a peal. Call it "block" instead of touch if
you like, to avoid it being confused with real touches which we may also
want to prove in a similar way to peals.

> Now you are confusing 'change' with 'row'.

Replace every "change" with "row" if you like. I meant change as in a row,
which is the usual ringers' shorthand. "Row" better in a formal document, I 
agree.

> You are defining 'stage' in terms of a method.

Sorry bunged in definition of stage as an afterthought. Needs to be
improved, to something like "Stage: the number of bells in the peal,
excluding any bell which stays in place for the entirety".

> What does 'lead' mean for Dixons?  Or for a non-treble-dominated Dixonoid?

Nothing. Don't pick that rule (I1) if you want to prove peals with Dixonoids
in!

MBD