To be fair Cockburn may have a point.I found this highly amusing quote from the IET website, sort of sums it up really:
david911cockburn said:I've described the 17th Edition as dangerous because it fails to comply with the 16th Edition
If the 17th doesn't comply with the 16th and the 16th was written to ensure safety and was accepted as such then there are two possible conclusions.
[1] the 16th did not ensure safety and the 17th might ensure safety,
[2] the 16th did ensure safety and the 17th may not ensure safety,
And even if he is totally wrong the process of proving him wrong could be beneficial to the understanding of what is safe, what isn't safe and what appears to be safe as it complies with rules 16th or 17th which appear to contradict each other in some places.
Now looking at the 14th I feel...........