View Single Post
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-11-2010, 08:42
Joachim Joachim is offline
Registered User
no team
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Corning NY
Posts: 52
Joachim has a spectacular aura aboutJoachim has a spectacular aura aboutJoachim has a spectacular aura about
Re: [FTC]: Possession of Rolling Goal Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by normalmutant View Post
I think the purpose of the definition was to say, "the robot cannot constrain the goal's movement to the movement of the robot, i.e. the robot cannot enclose the goal."
You may be right that the pull test (a functional test for grasping and/or enclosure) was the intent or purpose of the definition all along, and I know the GDC has nothing but good intentions--there is zero intent to mislead.

But confusion and misleading is the result of the current definition. There would not be so many questions on the point in the forum otherwise. People trying to understand the definition are asking questions in the forum, or are reading the answers. People who read the definition alone and think they understand (or who miss the "definitions" thread in the forum) are misled.

Under the circumstances, the definition would ideally be updated, rather than just interpreted in the forum. Alternatively, an official rulings list would be useful, one that lets teams (and officials, who often have one reading to get it right) get the needed information without reading many posts, sometimes conflicting. (Compare 27 to 17, and 27 to 5, for example.)
Reply With Quote