Got it - thanks. It does seem, however, that the new language protects Experimentals in the same way that "G" did, since 91.319(c) says:
"91.319 (c) Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator in special operating limitations, no person may operate an aircraft that has an experimental certificate over a densely populated area or in a congested airway. The Administrator may issue special operating limitations for particular aircraft to permit takeoffs and landings to be conducted over a densely populated area or in a congested airway, in accordance with terms and conditions specified in the authorization in the interest of safety in air commerce."
So as long as the OL's have either "G" or "H"'s wording in them, 91.319 (c) is being met with respect to authorization in the OL's.
So again, I'll ask - what's the issue that the DAR/FSDO has/had with the new wording? They seem completely functionally equivalent to me, both with respect to 91.319 and actual operations... And I still think the new wording is better, as THEORETICALLY, if you had an non-towered airport near a large city and didn't talk to ATC to get there, the PREVIOUS wording (from "G") would THEORETICALLY prohibit you from taking off or landing there, as you wouldn't have ATC "direction" to do so. Not that anyone paid attention to this, or got violated for it, but still - with the NEW wording from "H", it's not even a THEORETICAL violation anymore. And that's good, no?