2NT 2C whoops 3C (Stayman)

New laws. Pd opens 2NT, you bid 2C Stayman, and want to correct to 3C
without barring partner from the auction using 27B1(b):

 if ... the insufficient bid is corrected with a legal call that in
the Director's opinion has the same meaning* as, or a more precise
meaning* than, the insufficient bid (such meaning being fully
contained within the possible meanings of the insufficient bid) the
auction proceeds without further rectification...

* the meaning of (information available from) a call is
the knowledge of what it shows and what it excludes.

I posted that you could do this (assuming you weren't playing Puppet
Stayman over 2NT and not over 1NT).

David Stevenson disagreed and suggested I start a new thread if I
wanted to discuss it.

Then I decided David was right. Ignoring garbage/weak/nonforcing
Stayman, 2C over 1NT shows around 8+ points, whereas 3C over 2NT shows
around 5+ points. Adding in garbage stayman seemed to muddy the waters
but not change the answer.

And now I have flipped again back to it being okay (and hence will
start a new thread). I was viewing 2C as showing information about a
hand (say, a 4-card major and enough points to invite to game,
depending on system). Another way to look at it is simply an asking
bid -- partner, do you have a 4 card-major?

And in that sense, 3C (over 2NT) has the same meaning as 2C (over
1NT). So it would be an allowable substitution that does not bar
partner from auction.

I am sympathetic to a director who doesn't want to view it that way,
because after all I wasn't viewing it that way. But the probably
intent of the laws was to allow the 3 Clubs correction without
penalty, and that does seem like the better ruling (if both are
potentially legal).

Frustrating.