Obsolete Terminology

[Danek Duvall]

Pierre-Yves David wrote:

> We need to distinct:
> 
> - "A -> B and A -> C": conflict between B and C
> - "A -> (B and C)":  A have been split between B and C
> 
> But we don't need to distinct:
> 
> - "A -> C and B -> C": A and B merged into C
> - "(A and B) ->": A and B merged into C
> 
> So, there is not need to allow multiple precursors. But it's necessary to allow multiple successors in the same marker.
> 
> Simpler format being simpler, we don't have variable number of precursors.

I understand; thanks.

Danek