Oracle rules texts have several suspicious variations which do not appear to correspond to any differences in rules meaning.
For example, they may have any of the following forms...
[Do Action A] and [Do Action B].
[Do Action A], then [Do Action B].
[Do Action A]. Then [Do Action B].
[Do Action A]. [Do Action B].
Additionally, the word "also" is sometimes, but not always, embedded into an Action B.
Does any of this affect card functionality?
I know that for an instruction to draw or manifest multiple cards, each card draw or manifestation constitutes its own action, i.e., if you manifest two cards from the top of your library you do not get to choose which has an earlier timestamp, whereas if you Collected Company them onto the battlefield you do. This distinction can also affect how triggered abilities or replacement effects apply. However, this is determined by the nature of instructions in question; I'm not sure whether their wording in the context of the rules text also matters.
Secondly, there are differences in information revelation determined by the nature of instructions, i.e., players later in APNAP order applying an instruction for all players to make choices simultaneously learn earlier players' choices if cards are being chosen in public zones, but not if cards are being chosen in hidden zones (Rankle, Master of Pranks exemplifies both), but again, I'm not sure whether wording can also matter, such as when players are making choices across multiple actions within a single instruction, or across multiple instructions.
Do these wording differences in rules text matter at all?