I'm a bit confused about this one (since I just regenerated the data yesterday), but when I rerun aggregation on my forked master (and checking on upstream master), the changes from #227 don't seem to have been in the aggregated output files. This pertains to issue #226, where we decided to 1. move all rings to inferior position and 2. remove devoicing on both segments (@drammock you noted 2 - in cases of dentals we use the diacritics on all base segments in a complex segment, e.g. t̪d̪ , so this is still correct to not have devoicing throughout?).
I'm a bit confused about this one (since I just regenerated the data yesterday), but when I rerun aggregation on my forked master (and checking on upstream master), the changes from #227 don't seem to have been in the aggregated output files. This pertains to issue #226, where we decided to 1. move all rings to inferior position and 2. remove devoicing on both segments (@drammock you noted 2 - in cases of dentals we use the diacritics on all base segments in a complex segment, e.g. t̪d̪ , so this is still correct to not have devoicing throughout?).