#692,proposed fixes for ratings

[gernotstarke]

@michaelpog please also have a look.

I changed the rating in the LG title from (R1,R3) to "R1-R3" and removed one R2 in the EN version
(seems the DE version was more consistent)

[github-actions]

Build Successful! You can find a link to the downloadable artifacts below.

Name	Link
Commit	7e0b471
Logs	https://github.com/isaqb-org/curriculum-foundation/actions/runs/12734355500
Download	https://github.com/isaqb-org/curriculum-foundation/suites/32960828645/artifacts/2418826182

[alxlo]

Even if I earn a very special frown from @gernotstarke for being extraordinarily nit-picky: For the sake of consistency (see e.g. LG 03-08, same situation there): If we don't have a R2 learning goal in here, it should be (R1, R3), not (R1-R3).
Personally I find the latter visually much more pleasing, but it's not consistent.
A (in my opinion) acceptable compromise between visually appealing and correct would be to consistently use the notation (R1+R3) in such cases.

Meanwhile, in the department of microscopic problems... ;-)

[gernotstarke]

@alxlo, Monsieur PEP (Personne extraordinairement pointilleuse), you are obviously very right in your observation concerning consistency. I change the rating back to (R1,R3) - as NOT to introduce another symbol (+). As we deleted R2 in the EN version of this LG, this seems the most consistent approach.

[mikesperber]

Great! (Belatedly.)