Re: Symmetric slur input

Janek Warchoł writes: > 2013/8/7 David Kastrup > >> Han-Wen Nienhuys writes: >> >> > On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 9:18 AM, David Kastrup wrote: >> >> I don't think that distributing ( and ) between standalone event and >> >> post-event respectively is a concept that will carry the day >> >>>

Re: Symmetric slur input

Hi, 2013/8/7 David Kastrup > Han-Wen Nienhuys writes: > > > On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 9:18 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > >> I don't think that distributing ( and ) between standalone event and > >> post-event respectively is a concept that will carry the day > >> sufficiently to be given

Re: Symmetric slur input

Han-Wen Nienhuys writes: > On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 9:18 AM, David Kastrup wrote: >> I don't think that distributing ( and ) between standalone event and >> post-event respectively is a concept that will carry the day >> sufficiently to be given a chance at a comeback. It would make >

Re: Symmetric slur input (was: [GLISS] differentiating pre/post/neutral commands)

On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 9:18 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > I don't think that distributing ( and ) between standalone event and > post-event respectively is a concept that will carry the day > sufficiently to be given a chance at a comeback. It would make > (c (d) e) > visually co

Symmetric slur input (was: [GLISS] differentiating pre/post/neutral commands)

David Kastrup writes: > Mathieu Huiban writes: > >>> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 2:27 AM, David Kastrup wrote: >>> I don't think that distributing ( and ) between standalone event and post-event respectively is a concept that will carry the day sufficiently to be given a chance at a