[Jprogramming] Draft reference card for J9.04

[Elijah Stone]

I'll add that while I completely understand the original choice to elide 
subscripts, I will argue for them anyway.  I have an article in the dustbin on 
the relationship between verb rank and noun rank, which used both subscripts 
and ellipses, because I found them didactically valuable; I think the result 
was clearer with them than without, even though j-as-mathematical-notation is 
perfectly capable of subsisting without them.

I think the use of ellipses in the refcard is telling.  Ellipses are more 
metanotational than subscripts, since a subscript has clear semantics--it is 
just a funny way of supplying an argument to a function--whereas the meaning 
of an ellipsis must be inferred in every context.  So if ellipses are allowed, 
there is no reason to exclude subscripts.

On Tue, 9 Aug 2022, Hauke Rehr wrote:

> +1 for using subscripts, also in explanations of hooks and forks,
> and in the Modifier Trains table
>
> regarding footnotes b and c in the Scalar Dyadic Verbs table,
> I read c as explaining the /inflection/, and b the attempt at
> translating to known semantics in the middle column
> So I don’t think it’s that inconsistent.
>
> Am 09.08.22 um 23:28 schrieb Elijah Stone:
>> I would also use subscripts for 0, 1, and n.
>
> -- 
> ----------------------
> mail written using NEO
> neo-layout.org
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>