What is"Dynamic Operational Quantum Logic", or "Intuitionistic Quantum Logic", or "New-Style Operational Quantum Logic",  or "Quantum Logicality"?

A lot of names used for essentially the same thing.  In short, the "failure" of old-style quantum logic, either operational or not (we exclude here Foulis-Randall-style empirical statistics which did survive) in the following two senses, are essentially due to a failure to recognize a fundamentally dynamic ingredient in the kinematics of quantum theory itself.  Formally, the core of construction relies on two pillars: (a more subtle less sloganistic outline will be put here soon)

Read:

B. Coecke: 'Quantum Logic in Intuitionistic Perspective' (arXiv: math.LO/0011208), Studia Logica 70, 353-383 (2002).

B. Coecke, and S. Smets: 'The Sasaki-Hook is not a Static Implicative Connective but Induces a Backward (in Time) Dynamic One that Assigns Causes' (quant-ph/0111076).

I. Stubbe ``What can we certainly say about what may possibly be? The operational resolution, quantales of induced state/property transitions, and causal duality as crux of the biscuit" Notes of talk at Comlab, Oxford.  SURVEY + REFS (2001).

Survey of the "old-style results" and the subject in general, including Foulis-Randall-style empirical statistics which is still an active field:

D.J. Foulis: 'A Half Century of Quantum Logic What Have we Learned?', Talk (1995).

B. Coecke, D.J. Moore and A. Wilce: 'Operational Quantum Logic: An Overview' (arXiv: quant-ph/0008019) In: Current Research in Operational Quantum Logic, B.Coecke, D.J. Moore and A. Wilce (Eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000.