Should the Uruguay Round negotiators on the Antidumping Code take the approach of the Tokyo Round and concentrate on a still more systematic interpretation of the existing notions embodied in current GATT texts on antidumping? Or should they adopt a wider approach to improve the basic notions on which GATT antidumping rules are based or to introduce new ones? So far, the proposals received by the Negotiating Group on antidumping rules have followed the first approach. They aim at tightening the interpretation of the basic notions embodied in GATT texts such as export price, normal and constructed values, comparison of normal value and export price, threat of injury, price undercutting, and undertaking. They do not introduce fundamentally new notions. This paper argues that the Uruguay Round negotiators should not feel limited to the first approach, which is based on a too narrow conception of "codification".