[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: hyphen syntax
From: |
Noeck |
Subject: |
Re: hyphen syntax |
Date: |
Thu, 18 Feb 2016 00:02:48 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 |
Hi Simon,
> You should have come back to the entire quote: ‘And I think the double
> items suit the advanced functionality better (advanced in comparison to
> printing a hyphen character from a font).’ I didn’t mean ‘advanced’ in
> the sense of ‘only for advanced users’ or ‘rare’.
I know. I'm sorry to misuse the quote a bit. Your sentence just made me
want to write what I was thinking before – even though it did not fully
fit to your statement.
> But three characters versus four characters to type doesn’t seem enough
> of a difference to justify the change.
That might well be true. I am undecided myself. I think I like the
single hyphen (syl - la - ble) still ;)
Cheers,
Joram
- Re: hyphen syntax, (continued)
- Re: hyphen syntax, Dan Eble, 2016/02/17
- Re: hyphen syntax, David Kastrup, 2016/02/17
- Re: hyphen syntax, Simon Albrecht, 2016/02/17
- Re: hyphen syntax, tisimst, 2016/02/17
- Re: hyphen syntax, Simon Albrecht, 2016/02/17
- Re: hyphen syntax, tisimst, 2016/02/17
- Re: hyphen syntax, Simon Albrecht, 2016/02/17
- Re: hyphen syntax, David Kastrup, 2016/02/17
- Re: hyphen syntax, Noeck, 2016/02/17
- Re: hyphen syntax, Simon Albrecht, 2016/02/17
- Re: hyphen syntax,
Noeck <=
- Re: hyphen syntax, David Kastrup, 2016/02/17
- Re: hyphen syntax, Dan Eble, 2016/02/17
- (OT) Re: hyphen syntax, Simon Albrecht, 2016/02/17