[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Provide \hide and \no functions for transparent and void glyphs (iss
|
From: |
Janek Warchoł |
|
Subject: |
Re: Provide \hide and \no functions for transparent and void glyphs (issue 6575048) |
|
Date: |
Wed, 3 Oct 2012 08:25:23 +0200 |
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:15 AM, <address@hidden> wrote:
> Given existing naming choices, \hide/\unHide is an obvious pairing.
> \omit/unOmit would be logical but awkward, I'd lead towards
> \omit/\remit.
Whoah, i didn't know that "remit" is a proper English word!
Sounds like "Kermit" to me... :P
(frankly, one of the problems i have with "omit" is the fact that it's
not a basic English word - it's better to use simple words for the
sake of non-native English speakers)
> \no has no good reversion, and the pairing \no
> DynamicText / \yes DynamicText is too awful to contemplate.
\yes would be horrible.
But \restore is not that bad...
Janek
- Re: Provide \hide and \no functions for transparent and void glyphs (issue 6575048), (continued)
Re: Provide \hide and \no functions for transparent and void glyphs (issue 6575048), dak, 2012/10/02
Re: Provide \hide and \no functions for transparent and void glyphs (issue 6575048), pkx166h, 2012/10/02
Re: Provide \hide and \no functions for transparent and void glyphs (issue 6575048), dak, 2012/10/02
Re: Provide \hide and \no functions for transparent and void glyphs (issue 6575048), dak, 2012/10/03
Re: Provide \hide and \no functions for transparent and void glyphs (issue 6575048), dak, 2012/10/03