I'm glad we have a discussion started - that was my desire ... rather than to air any particular gripe.
Alan, I think you hit the nail on the head- when you use the code to determine the design, it's the tail waving the dog.
HotLine, you brought up a good example to make my case: receptacle spacing. Strict adherence to the code rule - using your tape measure to carefully space your receptacles exactly 12-ft from each other - will nearly always result in the receptacle being placed dead-center behind the couch or the bed. For those who remember the introdiction of the AFCI, it was the 'extension cord pinched by furniture' that was the original reason we 'needed' this new technology.
Sure. placing the receptacle behind the bed 'meets code' - but don't you think that, perhaps, we'd be better off placing the receptacles somewhere else?
I can use my screwdriver as a punch or pry bar. Ever notice that Klein ("The best in the world") will not honor their warranty if there's evidence of such use? It's their position that you have abused the tool, used it as it was never intended.
Ditto for the code. Right in the beginning it says it's not a design manual. Why do we let it be used as one? Why do customers tolerate it? After all, the housewife won't tolerate a styrofoam countertop - even if it 'meets code.'
As for the code being 'simply correct:' I'm not sure I understand that response. It has been my observation that while good design invariably meets code, 'code minimum' is rarely good design. Do you disagree?
