explain this argument and critically analyse to show how validity and enforceability can be shown, " Option 1 offers a more detailed and comprehensive definition of an arbitration agreement, it states and subparagraphs (3) and (4) specifically address the validity of electronic communications as written agreements, a critical issue in today's digital world. They explicitly recognize electronic communications as a form of "written agreement," provided the information is accessible for future reference. This aligns with the increasing reliance on electronic communication in international commerce. For instance, National Oil Corp. v. Chilworth Marine (1993) exemplifies the difficulties arising from the absence of clear rules on electronic communications as arbitration agreements. This case involved disputes arising from contractual agreements between parties in the oil industry, concerning maritime transportation or related services. The parties disputed whether an arbitration agreement that referred to "written" communications included electronic communications. The tribunal ultimately held that it did, but the lack of clear rules on this issue could have led to a different outcome in another case. The reference to electronic communications suggests that there was ambiguity or contention over whether electronic exchanges between the parties constituted valid arbitration agreements. Without clear guidelines or definitions in place, this ambiguity could have led to litigation and prolonged disputes, ultimately resulting in financial and time costs for the involved parties. " use any other cases or articles to evidence the point, reference it