On 2026-06-21 10:20, Ihor Radchenko wrote: > Whether current version is "wrong" mathematically or not does not > matter. It does the job, even if it does not map priorities to the > full available range. Our goal is not to map things mathematically > correctly, but in ways useful for users.
I don’t think dismissing it as ‘mathematical’ is correct, or even useful. Non-mathematical users can appreciate symmetry, idempotence, periodicity, etc. even if they can’t describe it that way. > The existing approach is working. Uh, sure. Cancelled, as I seem to be the only one who cares about this. -- Jacob S. Gordon [email protected] Please don’t send me HTML emails or MS Office/Apple iWork documents. https://useplaintext.email/#etiquette https://www.fsf.org/campaigns/opendocument
