[r-t] Going where angels fear to tread...
matthew at frye.org.uk
Wed Jun 11 00:23:16 UTC 2014
On 10 Jun 2014, at 13:03, Giles Blundell <grblundell at googlemail.com> wrote:
> I would also like to add
> something that might read like a restriction but which is intended to be
> permissive - namely that the report to the Peal Records Committee should
> include enough information - either using the terms in the Definitions or
> otherwise - to enable a third party to reconstruct the rows of the peal and
> satisfy themselves that it met the Definition of a peal. That is, we would
> not restrict the reporting of a Peal to terms given in the current
> Decisions: if you must resort to submitting a spreadsheet of the rows rung
> to demonstrate what was rung then that is what you can do.
I think this is a very sensible path to take. Especially the final resort of submitting the rows rung verbatim.
In fact, regardless of any other potential changes to the decisions, I think all peals should be required to be submitted with a composition of some description. It is surely information of interest and BellBoard has all the infrastructure to store and report this information (and many do already).
More information about the ringing-theory