I know this isn't perfect either but perhaps something a little more to the point like...only trapeze systems will be allowed on which the attachment point can be disengaged from the harness if it was attached to a submerged object while being worn by the user.

I can understand why they might be squeamish to define the rule any further due to liability and that further definition might also imply that they will need to have a list of approved hardware. However, if they don't make it a little more defined, they will not achieve anything other than giving the issue a little more publicity. Perhaps the publicity is all they hope to achieve - it has got us talking about it in two threads and I'm now thinking about what I'm going to replace my harness with regardless of the rule change.