We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
I know that I said "if in doubt (about the module), leave it out". But I was wrong, ... so please change that now.
We need the module in an \sn{foo?bar} iff \sn{bar} would be ambiguous (as to which module it is from) in the current context.
\sn{foo?bar}
\sn{bar}
I know that later annotations can introduce ambitutity and maybe we could maintain ambiguity in the current file.
I have the feeling that we are doing now introduces too many ambiguities. If all else fails, we will have to always give the module.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
jfschaefer
No branches or pull requests
I know that I said "if in doubt (about the module), leave it out". But I was wrong, ... so please change that now.
We need the module in an
\sn{foo?bar}
iff\sn{bar}
would be ambiguous (as to which module it is from) in the current context.I know that later annotations can introduce ambitutity and maybe we could maintain ambiguity in the current file.
I have the feeling that we are doing now introduces too many ambiguities. If all else fails, we will have to always give the module.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: