continuous residence clause in ILR requirement

[neo]

Hi friends, I have been working in UK for 3.5 years on WP without interrupt and I'm going to transfer to HSMP this year. In the past years I have many business trips and holidays ouside UK, about 5 months in total but each time less 3 months. I will have another 1.5 months absence in November&December to look after my wife to give baby. I'm not sure whether it will break the continuous residence requirement. Hope I can get suggestions from you.
Do I need employment reference to prove all my business absences when I apply ILR? I'm going to leave this company soon and I don't want to come back to ask for reference if it is not necessary.

I refer to the following clause in chapter 5 annex F(found in sticky threads). To be honest, I don't understand the criteria exactly:

3. CALCULATION OF THE FOUR YEAR PERIOD FOR SETTLEMENT

In assessing whether or not an applicant has fulfilled the requirement to have spent 4 years in continuous residence in the same capacity, short absences abroad, for example for holidays (consistent with annual paid leave) or business trips (consistent with maintaining employment or self-employment in the United Kingdom), may be disregarded, provided he has clearly continued to be based here. 3.1. Discretion in cases where continuous residence has been broken
In addition, time spent here in this capacity may exceptionally be aggregated, and continuity not insisted upon, in cases where:

* there have been no absences abroad (apart from those described in paragraph 3 above) and authorised employment or business here has not been broken by any interruptions of more than 3 months or amounting to more than 6 months in all; or

* there have been longer absences abroad, provided the absences were for compelling grounds either of a compassionate nature or for reasons related to the applicant's employment or business in the United Kingdom. None of the absences abroad should be of more than 3 months, and they must not amount to more than 6 months in all.

[ppron747]

My own (inexpert) reading of this is that you're probably OK - under the guidance as it stood last year, before the increase to five years, anyway.

But I think you'll need to see what the revised Annex F says, to be sure...

[neo]

Thanks Paul. If someone knows the new version of the guildance, please give me a hand.