In message <861bbe214e.martin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Martin Wuerthner <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > In message <4459F5DA.5010002@xxxxxxxx> > Clive Bonsall <C.Bonsall@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Christopher Rayson wrote: > >> On Thu, 4 May 2006, Martin Wuerthner wrote: > >> > >> > >>>So, the feature would be called "Subsumed arrows"? I think I still have > >>>a slight preference for "Coincident arrows". Any other opinions? > >> > >> > >> I'd refer to the current style for arrows as "Extended heads". I'm not > >> sure what the opposite to that would be, though. "Contracted"? > Chris > > > > Not bad ... I would suggest: > > > > "Integral" (i.e. part of the line) for the new style > > "Extended" for the current style > > "Integral" is a great idea - very much to the point and probably > easier to understand than "coincident". Certainly my new favourite, > thanks Clive. We do not really need a name for the old style since I > want to do it as an option button, but it is good to have "extended" > in case it is needed. > > Could anyone give me a Dutch expression for "integral"? > > Martin Integraal ?? -- Roel Wagenaar. E-mail: roel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Thuis-pagina: http://www.familie-wagenaar.net It is easier to fight for one's principles then to live up to them.