Evan, I wonder if the changes Shane suggested in MethodGeddon would make Simplified Acquistion suffice for what Steve was asking about? Also can you explain how from the example: Two path acquisition: A contains B1 and C1, B1 contains B2, C1 contains C2 How (Natural Acquisition): A.B1.B2.C1 == (((C1 o A) o (B1 o A)) o ((B2 o B1) o (B1 o A))) equates to: "Roughly speaking, search the objects in the reverse of the order they were mentioned in, along the shortest physical path between each object." and how it differs in effect from: A.B1.B2.C1 == (((C1 o A) o (B1 o A)) o (B2 o (B1 o A))) (which is what I think simplified Acquisition would return...) cheers, Chris PS: This might just be explaining how the (x o y) notation actually tells you where the object's attribute comes from :S (in the above example, how, in each case, the notation explains where C1 comes from...) PPS: What's happening with the Zope-Dev Wiki? Is it being fazed out?