I've been hoping that this argument would simply die out as the various parties agreed to disagree (it seems unlikely that anyone is ever likely to convince Inq to alter his stance, nor is he likely to gain many converts to his own point of view). However the argument is threatening to spill over into this thread and rather than allow that I felt it better to redirect it back to this thread, with the following additional point: Unless I'm mistaken Inq's argument is based on the use of the word "uniform" in both the BFA and USFA rules, where it is used in T.45.4.b), M.25, M.25.3.e) in reference to a "national uniform" (the word "uniform" also appears in m8.6 and m.16.2 however I suspect that even Inq would acknowledge that in both of these instances the word is used as an adjective rather than a noun). The problem with Inq's argument is that the word "uniforme" doesn't appear anywhere in the applicable sections of the "THE STANDARD" for the written rules (i.e the French-language version of the FIE rules). The rules dealing with the appearance of individual fencers (t.45.4.b) and m.25) generally refer to it simply as "la tenue nationale". Given that the French-language version of the rules doesn't use the word "uniforme" it's difficult to place any particular significance on the use of its English language equivalent in translations of the rules. I suppose that Inq could continue to argue that the word "uniforme" does appear in the Appendix to the Material Section however that would be quite a stretch, even by his standards (especially since those standards were only added to the rules about 25 years ago). He could also argue that the word "uniform" appears in various notes within the USFA rules which either waive or modify certain FIE rules for USFA competition however since these notes only apply to USFA events it is difficult to see how they can be considered representative of the fencing community as a whole.