[r-t] History

[King, Peter R]

>> I wouldn't alter the definition of a change, but I would introduce a 
>> definition for a null change. As a null change is then not a change, 
>> you just do not count it as a change.

>I'm sorry, but I think this is an exceedingly ill-advised suggestion.

I would agree with Don on this. Surely the "null change" is just the identity permutation and as such just as much a permutation as any other, indeed without it the permutation group would not be a group!