Gulf
It is another typical example of the European parliament meddling in areas that they know little about and then failing to deliver a definitve document. I always thought CAP371 had some 'grey' areas. Sub part Q is more grey than John Major ever was!
As MAFP says, it is very much down to NAA's to decide on the actual rules. However, there are a lot of scare stories around about what 'might' come out of it. Ultimately a big deciding factor will be the aircraft that a company operates. There is little point having the crew able to do 18-22 hours when the aircraft is out of steam after 14.
When it comes to talking about augmented crew there are various definitions. At a basic level it is where a 3rd pilot is carried on a normal 2 crew aircraft in order to alleviate the limitations of factorisation. There is no rest element involved. At the other end of the scale is the full replacement crew option where a dedicated and separate rest area is provided so that a crew member can take rest duringt he cruise phase of the flight. The rest area is traditionally not popular amongst the charter airlines. It takes up too much valuable space which could be dedicated to seating. Also, European charter airlines (normally) don't operate aircraft with the range to justify the separate rest areas.
At the end of the day there is going to be a period of familiarisation with the rules. IMHO most people will notice very little difference as NAA rules will ultimately be more limiting than Sub Part Q.