Heh, that won't necessarily be conclusive either
It is not without precedent that the posted rankings don't follow the rules, either through (a) error or (b) pretending something is specified differently than they actually wrote it or (c) the person applying the rules having a different intent than the intent of the person who drafted them or (d) the intent may change over time, even though the wording may not.
btw, as an example, one of the WTA projections in a match notes earlier this year reversed the order of two tied players. In that case, I asked why and got not reply. Thankfully the official rankings, when published, got it right. However, on Aug 6, rankings where first published this Monday with the same king of error - this time it was Nadia & Fran reversed, again ignoring the wording of the rules for ties, and that one made it into the official published rankings. I brought it to their attention and again got no reply. It was simply corrected later that same day. Errors do occur. The rules even recognise that, essentially saying that if an error is discovered after it's too late to change it, you may be stuck with it. In other words, shit happens
Thankfully they appear willing to at least correct errors even after they make it into the published rankings - if they are caught early enough.
When it comes to deciding other kinds of issues, they may not be so willing to admit they are acting contrary to the rules as written. The bottom line? We may be right in interpreting the rules the way they are written and they may simply pretend they say something they don't
It wouldn't be the first time