That is the right principle. But as the quoted text says, I am not sure the ID would understand this, as bracket notation is not fully implemented.
Since it is always clear in bracket notation what belongs to the same leg, I suppose there would be no reason to forbid compound legs. The XBetza compiler already expands the moves like you did here, not for different atoms, but for different directions of the same atom. (So aK gives 56 moves in the move table!) Your Thaumaturge could then be written as [xKCZ-KCZ]. Of course there is currently no support for this at all in the ID (except for the WF case implied by K), but it is a thing to keep in mind when implementing direct compilation of the bracket notation.
That is the right principle. But as the quoted text says, I am not sure the ID would understand this, as bracket notation is not fully implemented.
Since it is always clear in bracket notation what belongs to the same leg, I suppose there would be no reason to forbid compound legs. The XBetza compiler already expands the moves like you did here, not for different atoms, but for different directions of the same atom. (So aK gives 56 moves in the move table!) Your Thaumaturge could then be written as [xKCZ-KCZ]. Of course there is currently no support for this at all in the ID (except for the WF case implied by K), but it is a thing to keep in mind when implementing direct compilation of the bracket notation.