User blog comment:P進大好きbot/New Issue on Traditional Analyses/@comment-39541634-20190825100759/@comment-39541634-20190826053611

People not specifying the OCF they are using is not the main problem. If they are using any notation correctly, you can usually infer which notation they are using (assuming they are using one of the well-known ones).

The real problem is that:

(1) People here often misuse notations.

(2) They often refuse to even acknowledge that there different notations which aren't compatible with one another. So they mix different notations, without even realizing it (like the example we're talking about here).

And this was a problem before UNOCF was born. It's just that UNOCF gives some people the illusion that the problem was solved, since it is supposed to be some kind of "catch-all standard" notation.

On the bright side, it is now easier to warn newcomers about these pitfalls, since we have a concrete named thing (UNOCF) to give as an example.