> Both indicate a request rather than talking about actual physical ability to perform the action. That's why I said I didn't think it was incorrect, but merel

> Both indicate a request rather than talking about actual physical ability to perform the action. That's why I said I didn't think it was incorrect, but merely ambiguous. The use of "could" could also be interpreted as talking about the physical ability to perform the action. That was precisely how mburns seemed to have interpreted it. My comment was merely trying to clarify your explanation with a simpler version that tried to eliminate the ambiguity that was probably the source of the confusion. I got an upvote for that comment. Maybe it was them and it did work. > "It could be great if this could be done..." That sounds like one wouldn't be sure if it would be great or not. I don't think anyone meant or interpreted that.