Re: Provide \hide and \omit functions for transparent and void glyphs (issue 6575048)

[Marc Hohl]

Am 29.09.2012 18:54, schrieb Colin Campbell:
> On 12-09-29 09:47 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> > I am not convinced.  Unless I see either a new proposal that I feel I
> > can get behind myself, or more prominent public support for one of the
> > numerous existing proposals including \next, I am going to stick with
> > \single.
> >
> > Since by far the easiest time to press a change is before a first
> > version is installed, people should speak up now if they feel that
> > <c' \next \easyHeadsOn e' g'> is significantly better than
> > <c' \single \easyHeadsOn e' g'> for changing just the head on e', or if
> > they think they have another good name.
>
>
> From a relatively uninformed point of view, \single seems to be 
> directly and tightly coupled to the object following it, and only to 
> that one object, only for the life of that object.  \next doesn't seem 
> quite so definite and restricted, for some reason, perhaps because 
> there could be an implication that it applies to the next instance of 
> the object either before or after the \next token.
You are a native speaker, so I would trust you more than my feelings.
\single would be ok for me then.
>   It's early and the caffeine level is rather low in the brain stem, 
> but \single is the more clear term for me.
Well, here it is 19:00 and the caffeine level is rather low already ;-)

Regards,

Marc
> Cheers,
> Colin