Simply put, I read that as "angularity partility" and "aspect partility" coinciding, not "angularity (any orb)" and "aspect partility," which seems to be the way Steve read it, going from a recent discussion elsewhere on the forum, if I understood him correctly. Jim then said he meant close angularity.It is when angularity and aspect partility coincide that outstanding incidents are most likely to come about.
I don't see why we'd need to be too stringent about these rules, but I found this amusing, and thought it could be informative also.