Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Skierkiewicz
As Bill Miller explained last year, should a team add something to the indent that is made the same as a bumper, it will not be a bumper and we were not to inspect anything that covered that area.
|
After thinking about it for a minute more, I see which clause you're getting at—in 2012's Fig. 4-3, FIRST implicitly interpreted frame openings along the side of a robot as not being exterior corners by showing them as permissible despite not having an 8 in leg of protected frame perimeter on one side of the vertex. (This was convenient, because it allowed robots to have unprotected openings.)
That works for case of a 180° frame perimeter vertex—which can plausibly be said to be not a corner—but doesn't actually make sense in the general case, as we're finding in this thread. The lack of generality didn't occur to me last year.
I agree FIRST needs to issue a ruling on this one.