David,
I just had to chuckle about your comment. I was talking with someone this week and they said the same thing about a course I was at (a Ross course). They were talking about how someone who worked there captured the real design intent of the course. The person I was discussing this with was someone who worked at the course. I asked him how they knew what the design intent was. Did Ross write it down somewhere in the plans, did it get documented in an interview along the way or something else? The guy said, "Well we just kind of thought this is what Ross would want."
So I find it funny when people throw that phrase about design intent out like it means something. Unless it is documented somewhere it is hard to pinpoint. With Tulsa, I think it is pretty straight forward what Tilly wanted with the holes as they are still representative of his style, but at other projects that have been messed around with that may be harder to ascertain. But even if it is documented we are still interpreting what we think they would want and implement into today's game.
Wasn't trying to pick on you or anything, just struck me as funny when I read that.