So what exactly are you saying?
That you think the forms are worthless if Ed Parker had made them on his own when he was just beginning?
Or that James Wing Woo was more qualified so because he possibly made them they are better?
I think it comes down to having a mind to analyze the information in the form on its own accord, decide if its worthy of its place in our or your or whoevers system and go from there.
Personally I do not care if mickey mouse came up with the form as long as it is the most efficient teaching tool for passing that information on to the level of practitioner it is designed for.
I am interested in results, not tradition for traditions sake.
Seriously other then as a side note for future practitioners what difference does it make if the form was created in 54 of 04, by Ed Parker Sr. or James Wing Woo or anyone else?
If I found a form that taught the beginning lessons more efficiently then this I would use it and discard the old.
I understand people want to hash out arguments 50 years in the making, but the true value that the correct answer has on the current situation is close to nothing.
I do not think the comment of the answer being yes for any other kenpo practitioner that values kata is a correct assessment either. I value Kata, I know several variations of several of the forms, why they are varied, and what the differences mean. That's alot more important then whether Mills is correct or whether the Tracys are correct...seriously. I can understand having a conversation or debate about the efficiency of the movements, about possible upgrades, or changes to the material... but whether it was taught to someone in 54 or 56 or whether it was created 30 or 50 years ago??
I also think people vastly overrate the value of katas in todays atmosphere. Katas are pretty much a useful tool only when training partners are unavailable, or someone has a condition that prevents them from actively working with another person. If you want to debate that I would love to hear your thoughts on the subject.