Quote:
Originally Posted by Duncan Macdonald
A rose by any other name...
A robot battery is any battery with these part numbers, even if it is not connected.
|
The following is an admittedly picky discussion of English grammar. Stop reading now if that's going to make you tear your hair out. And yes, I'm stopping after this. Promise.
So two things. First, I've always understood that clauses surrounded by commas like that are meant to be non-essential to the meaning of a sentence. So the sentence should have the same meaning without that clause.
Quote:
|
The only legal source of electrical energy for the ROBOT during the competition is one of the following approved 12VDC non-spillable lead acid batteries:
|
Second, I've always understood that such clauses are meant to describe the clause they're attached to. Which is why I removed the predicate of that sentence, since the predicate was modifying the subject ("The only legal source of electrical energy for the ROBOT during the competition"). The clause ("the ROBOT battery") is also modifying/associated with that subject.
That's how I tend to read things anyways. If I wanted to convey your version of meaning, I'd have phrased it:
Quote:
The ROBOT battery is one of the following approved 12VDC non-spillable lead acid batteries:
This battery is the only legal source of electrical energy for the ROBOT during the competition.
|
Anyways. Stopping now because at this point I've fully expressed my opinion on the battery counterweight issue. And the T6 inspection issue requires more and more detailed information from the teams in question as to the timing of modifications, re-inspection, etc.
EDIT: Also, your version of the rule would imply that you can use a battery as ballast on the robot, as long as it doesn't have one of those part numbers. My version also implies this, with the addition that those part numbers can also be used if they're not sourcing electricity.