In this method, the encoding of a secret involves calculating the difference between two consecutive shares rather than identifying a specific point at a designated index for the secret. This approach requires that if both the secret and a given share labeled A possess a header termed HEAD, then the subsequent share B must commence with a sequence of zeros denoted as ====, and share C should represent the additive inverse of HEAD. The essence or "slope" of the line becomes the secret within this framework, necessitating the inclusion of zeros in corresponding positions on the secret to maintain consistency in the headers across different shares.

This mechanism, while feasible, introduces potential complications when comparing the behavior of 2-of-M splits with those of K-of-M splits. Such differences might lead to confusion due to the disparate ways in which these schemes operate. Opting for a composite scheme that amalgamates various approaches to secret sharing evidently comes with its set of drawbacks, among which includes the challenge of maintaining uniformity across different types of splits without causing operational discrepancies. This highlights a critical consideration in the design and implementation of secret sharing schemes, underscoring the need to weigh the benefits against the possible sources of confusion that might arise from adopting a composite approach.