They say this
"- we are planning to overhaul the clearance/design rules system in V6.
Storing the clearance DIRECTLY for each track segment/via will conflict with any more sophisticated design rule management system."
I can see merit in clearance-by-segment, as it is easy to explain, but it is manually focused, and not compatible with Autorouters. If you rip-up a trace, the clearance info is lost.
Being manual in nature, it also consumes many mouse clicks, and is less compatible with more formal design rule definitions (which avoid operator over-rides)
Best to wait to see what the “overhaul the clearance/design rules system in V6” means - this thread is about PAD / PART clearance, which is useful to be able to mange with fine pitched parts.
Expanding that, a more general neck-down-rule would permit shove routing to exit fine pads, then use a default larger trace/clearance, but permit necking between pads.