Talk:Meet and join: Difference between revisions

Line 3:

[[User:Mike Battaglia|Mike Battaglia]] ([[User talk:Mike Battaglia|talk]]) 10:49, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

: First of all, thanks for all this Mike! Your new changes on the whole are great.

: I don't want to leave you with the misconception that "much of the below was addressed in this", however. If you re-read the concerns I expressed below, you should find that your latest changes actually address none of them.

: That said, and as you know, I've recently begun work on a new page presenting a general audience version of this topic. So I'm not going to get too hung up on detailed criticism of this mathematician-targeted page anymore. So if anyone wants to address those some day, great. Otherwise, no big deal.

: There is one thing, though, that I would still like to discuss. So I was particularly disappointed to find that you had agreed with me that it was a good idea to replace "curly logical and" ⋏ and "curly logical or" ⋎, however, you decided not to replace them with my suggestions, the & and | symbols, instead deciding to replace them with "square cap" ⊓ and "square cup" ⊔. Which to me neither makes it better or worse. So I'll repeat my request to go with & and | just in case you missed it when making your changes yesterday. And I'll repeat my arguments:

: 1) they are well-known symbols for and/intersection and or/union. Perhaps particularly by software engineers, but probably more widely than that, and in any case many people working on RTT have familiarity with computer code conventions like this.

: 2) they are already used by the xen community in web tools like Graham Breed's x31eq, my own extensive RTT writings, and notations like Inthar's for naming scales, which I can't seem to find at the moment.

: 3) they are easy to type on keyboards without web searching and copying-and-pasting or using special tools like Wincompose.

: 4) they don't have the historical hang ups that up/down based symbols have as described below.

: So, if you intentionally chose not to use the symbols for & and | for meet and join on this page as I had suggested, then I won't press you on the matter further. Though I would at least like to know what your reasons were. And also, if that is the case, would you mind at least — for outwards compatibility — adding a note that & and | can be used as well? --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 17:24, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

== Suggestion to add a helpful image ==

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 [[User:Mike Battaglia|Mike Battaglia]] ([[User talk:Mike Battaglia|talk]]) 10:49, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
+: First of all, thanks for all this Mike! Your new changes on the whole are great.
+: I don't want to leave you with the misconception that "much of the below was addressed in this", however. If you re-read the concerns I expressed below, you should find that your latest changes actually address none of them.
+: That said, and as you know, I've recently begun work on a new page presenting a general audience version of this topic. So I'm not going to get too hung up on detailed criticism of this mathematician-targeted page anymore. So if anyone wants to address those some day, great. Otherwise, no big deal.
+: There is one thing, though, that I would still like to discuss. So I was particularly disappointed to find that you had agreed with me that it was a good idea to replace "curly logical and" ⋏ and "curly logical or" ⋎, however, you decided not to replace them with my suggestions, the & and | symbols, instead deciding to replace them with "square cap" ⊓ and "square cup" ⊔. Which to me neither makes it better or worse. So I'll repeat my request to go with & and | just in case you missed it when making your changes yesterday. And I'll repeat my arguments:
+: 1) they are well-known symbols for and/intersection and or/union. Perhaps particularly by software engineers, but probably more widely than that, and in any case many people working on RTT have familiarity with computer code conventions like this.
+: 2) they are already used by the xen community in web tools like Graham Breed's x31eq, my own extensive RTT writings, and notations like Inthar's for naming scales, which I can't seem to find at the moment.
+: 3) they are easy to type on keyboards without web searching and copying-and-pasting or using special tools like Wincompose.
+: 4) they don't have the historical hang ups that up/down based symbols have as described below.
+: So, if you intentionally chose not to use the symbols for & and | for meet and join on this page as I had suggested, then I won't press you on the matter further. Though I would at least like to know what your reasons were. And also, if that is the case, would you mind at least — for outwards compatibility — adding a note that & and | can be used as well? --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 17:24, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
 == Suggestion to add a helpful image ==