[seqfan] Re: easy

franktaw at netscape.net franktaw at netscape.net
Sun Oct 2 05:46:41 CEST 2011

Why? Specifically, what is your response to my point (2)?

Franklin T. Adams-Watters

-----Original Message-----
From: Alonso Del Arte <alonso.delarte at gmail.com>

While I agree with your point 1), I disagree with removing the keyword. 
think that what needs to be done is to gradually identify those 
that ought to have it and add it as we encounter those sequences.


On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 7:20 PM, <franktaw at netscape.net> wrote:

> While we're on the subject, I would like to suggest removing the 
> keyword.
> 1) Current application is very hit or miss. There are tens of 
thousands of
> easy sequences that do not have the keyword.
> 2) I don't know what it's good for. Why would anyone every search for
> "easy" (or not "easy")? Leaving aside the current searches for 
> like "easy" and "more".
> 3) Showing that a sequence is easy is better done with a comment, 
> or program, so that one can see why it is easy.
> Franklin T. Adams-Watters
> ______________________________**_________________
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/

Alonso del Arte
Author at 
Musician at ReverbNation.com <http://www.reverbnation.com/alonsodelarte>


Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/


More information about the SeqFan mailing list