Also posted to HN as: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13886467 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13886467 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13879156

Also posted to HN as: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13886467 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13886467 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13879156 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13879156 For me the lesson here is "use unambigious language" rather than "{always|never} use an Oxford comma". The 29-page decision shows that the "Oxford comma" is only part of the court's interpretation of the law, and shows that the court examined several paths to reach an interpretation. http://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca1/16-1901/16-1901-2017-03-13.pdf?ts=1489437006 http://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca1/16-1901...