  Families of DFAs (FDFAs) have recently been introduced as a new
representation of $\omega$-regular languages. They target ultimately periodic
words, with acceptors revolving around accepting some representation $u\cdot
v^\omega$. Three canonical FDFAs have been suggested, called periodic,
syntactic, and recurrent. We propose a fourth one, limit FDFAs, which can be
exponentially coarser than periodic FDFAs and are more succinct than syntactic
FDFAs, while they are incomparable (and dual to) recurrent FDFAs. We show that
limit FDFAs can be easily used to check not only whether {\omega}-languages are
regular, but also whether they are accepted by deterministic B\"uchi automata.
We also show that canonical forms can be left behind in applications: the limit
and recurrent FDFAs can complement each other nicely, and it may be a good way
forward to use a combination of both. Using this observation as a starting
point, we explore making more efficient use of Myhill-Nerode's right
congruences in aggressively increasing the number of don't-care cases in order
to obtain smaller progress automata. In pursuit of this goal, we gain
succinctness, but pay a high price by losing constructiveness.
