Category talk:Lumatone mappings - Revision history

Lucius Chiaraviglio: /* Sorting for non-octave tunings */ Add number of pages affected so far;f fix formatting

2025-10-23T08:12:57Z

Sorting for non-octave tunings: Add number of pages affected so far;f fix formatting

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:12, 23 October 2025
Line 11:		Line 11:
	== Sorting for non-octave tunings ==		== Sorting for non-octave tunings ==

	I have it from an inside source that Lumatone mappings for non-octave tunings are going to be coming in REAL SOON — what should we do to keep these from getting inconveniently interleaved with the Lumatone mappings for octave tunings. (Right now, it's just Lumatone mapping for Bohlen-Pierce to worry about, but [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio/Keyboard Layout Lab/Non-Octave Lumatone mappings\|a couple of non-octave equal temperament mappings]] are on the way). [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 07:58, 18 October 2025 (UTC)~~<br>~~		I have it from an inside source that Lumatone mappings for non-octave tunings are going to be coming in REAL SOON — what should we do to keep these from getting inconveniently interleaved with the Lumatone mappings for octave tunings. (Right now, it's just Lumatone mapping for Bohlen-Pierce to worry about, but [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio/Keyboard Layout Lab/Non-Octave Lumatone mappings\|a couple of non-octave equal temperament mappings]] are on the way). [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 07:58, 18 October 2025 (UTC)
	Update: I found that the Navbox Lumatone template thinks that non-octave mappings are EDO mappings, including trying to fit them into the Lumatone mapping for ### series for navigation, so as a workaround I used <nowiki>[[Category:Lumatone mappings]]</nowiki>, which gets them into Category:Lumatone mappings separately from the EDO series, so that is a temporary fix for this particular problem. But once Navbox Lumatone is fixed to recognize non-octave tunings as such, this problem will most likely recur, unless the updated Navbox Lumatone code itself is somehow able to fix this. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 08:06, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
			Update: I found that the Navbox Lumatone template thinks that non-octave mappings are EDO mappings, including trying to fit them into the Lumatone mapping for ### series for navigation, so as a workaround I used <nowiki>[[Category:Lumatone mappings]]</nowiki>, which gets them into Category:Lumatone mappings separately from the EDO series, so that is a temporary fix for this particular problem. But once Navbox Lumatone is fixed to recognize non-octave tunings as such, this problem will most likely recur, unless the updated Navbox Lumatone code itself is somehow able to fix this. So far have 3 pages currently affected (really should be 4, but Lumatone mapping for Bohlen-Pierce currently counts as a named tuning temperament page and not Lumatone mapping for 13edt, whereas it is actually both). [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 08:12, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Lucius Chiaraviglio: /* Sorting for non-octave tunings */ Update

2025-10-23T08:06:42Z

Sorting for non-octave tunings: Update

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:06, 23 October 2025
Line 11:		Line 11:
	== Sorting for non-octave tunings ==		== Sorting for non-octave tunings ==

	I have it from an inside source that Lumatone mappings for non-octave tunings are going to be coming in REAL SOON — what should we do to keep these from getting inconveniently interleaved with the Lumatone mappings for octave tunings. (Right now, it's just Lumatone mapping for Bohlen-Pierce to worry about, but [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio/Keyboard Layout Lab/Non-Octave Lumatone mappings\|a couple of non-octave equal temperament mappings]] are on the way). [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 07:58, 18 October 2025 (UTC)		I have it from an inside source that Lumatone mappings for non-octave tunings are going to be coming in REAL SOON — what should we do to keep these from getting inconveniently interleaved with the Lumatone mappings for octave tunings. (Right now, it's just Lumatone mapping for Bohlen-Pierce to worry about, but [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio/Keyboard Layout Lab/Non-Octave Lumatone mappings\|a couple of non-octave equal temperament mappings]] are on the way). [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 07:58, 18 October 2025 (UTC)<br>
			Update: I found that the Navbox Lumatone template thinks that non-octave mappings are EDO mappings, including trying to fit them into the Lumatone mapping for ### series for navigation, so as a workaround I used <nowiki>[[Category:Lumatone mappings]]</nowiki>, which gets them into Category:Lumatone mappings separately from the EDO series, so that is a temporary fix for this particular problem. But once Navbox Lumatone is fixed to recognize non-octave tunings as such, this problem will most likely recur, unless the updated Navbox Lumatone code itself is somehow able to fix this. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 08:06, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Lucius Chiaraviglio: /* Sorting for non-octave tunings */ Add link to examples

2025-10-18T07:58:08Z

Sorting for non-octave tunings: Add link to examples

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:58, 18 October 2025
Line 11:		Line 11:
	== Sorting for non-octave tunings ==		== Sorting for non-octave tunings ==

	I have it from an inside source that Lumatone mappings for non-octave tunings are going to be coming in REAL SOON — what should we do to keep these from getting inconveniently interleaved with the Lumatone mappings for octave tunings. (Right now, it's just Lumatone mapping for Bohlen-Pierce to worry about, but a couple of non-octave equal temperament mappings are on the way). [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 07:56, 18 October 2025 (UTC)		I have it from an inside source that Lumatone mappings for non-octave tunings are going to be coming in REAL SOON — what should we do to keep these from getting inconveniently interleaved with the Lumatone mappings for octave tunings. (Right now, it's just Lumatone mapping for Bohlen-Pierce to worry about, but [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio/Keyboard Layout Lab/Non-Octave Lumatone mappings\|a couple of non-octave equal temperament mappings]] are on the way). [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 07:58, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Lucius Chiaraviglio: /* Sorting for non-octave tunings */ new section

2025-10-18T07:56:31Z

Sorting for non-octave tunings: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:56, 18 October 2025
Line 8:		Line 8:

	::: I created [[Module:ET sort key]]. I used it to edit [[Template:Navbox Lumatone]], which adds the corresponding categories to the page in addition to displaying the navbox itself (it's just more convenient that way). This module will count the number of digits in the EDO's size and output the needed sort key to make the numerical sorting work. It should be usable in other templates as well. Some other templates already had a similar feature built into their own modules, but it wasn't really possible to re-use that code, so that's why I made a separate module instead. --[[User:Fredg999\|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999\|talk]]) 00:57, 7 August 2025 (UTC)		::: I created [[Module:ET sort key]]. I used it to edit [[Template:Navbox Lumatone]], which adds the corresponding categories to the page in addition to displaying the navbox itself (it's just more convenient that way). This module will count the number of digits in the EDO's size and output the needed sort key to make the numerical sorting work. It should be usable in other templates as well. Some other templates already had a similar feature built into their own modules, but it wasn't really possible to re-use that code, so that's why I made a separate module instead. --[[User:Fredg999\|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999\|talk]]) 00:57, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

			== Sorting for non-octave tunings ==

			I have it from an inside source that Lumatone mappings for non-octave tunings are going to be coming in REAL SOON — what should we do to keep these from getting inconveniently interleaved with the Lumatone mappings for octave tunings. (Right now, it's just Lumatone mapping for Bohlen-Pierce to worry about, but a couple of non-octave equal temperament mappings are on the way). [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 07:56, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Fredg999: /* Sorting order */ Re

2025-08-07T00:57:01Z

Sorting order: Re

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:57, 7 August 2025
Line 6:		Line 6:

	:: Thanks. For the future, how did you fix this? I don't see any difference in the page source. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 21:07, 6 August 2025 (UTC)		:: Thanks. For the future, how did you fix this? I don't see any difference in the page source. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 21:07, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

			::: I created [[Module:ET sort key]]. I used it to edit [[Template:Navbox Lumatone]], which adds the corresponding categories to the page in addition to displaying the navbox itself (it's just more convenient that way). This module will count the number of digits in the EDO's size and output the needed sort key to make the numerical sorting work. It should be usable in other templates as well. Some other templates already had a similar feature built into their own modules, but it wasn't really possible to re-use that code, so that's why I made a separate module instead. --[[User:Fredg999\|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999\|talk]]) 00:57, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

Lucius Chiaraviglio: /* Sorting order */ How to do this elsewhere, if needed?

2025-08-06T21:07:57Z

Sorting order: How to do this elsewhere, if needed?

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:07, 6 August 2025
Line 4:		Line 4:

	: Done. --[[User:Fredg999\|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999\|talk]]) 15:52, 6 August 2025 (UTC)		: Done. --[[User:Fredg999\|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999\|talk]]) 15:52, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

			:: Thanks. For the future, how did you fix this? I don't see any difference in the page source. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 21:07, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Fredg999: /* Sorting order */ Done

2025-08-06T15:52:12Z

Sorting order: Done

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:52, 6 August 2025
Line 2:		Line 2:

	Any way to fix the sort order so that the EDO numbers sort properly? It's kind of annoying when 9edo is after 90edo through 99edo, etc. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 09:12, 6 August 2025 (UTC)		Any way to fix the sort order so that the EDO numbers sort properly? It's kind of annoying when 9edo is after 90edo through 99edo, etc. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio\|talk]]) 09:12, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

			: Done. --[[User:Fredg999\|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999\|talk]]) 15:52, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Lucius Chiaraviglio: Any way to fix the sort order?

2025-08-06T09:12:27Z

Any way to fix the sort order?

New page

== Sorting order ==

Any way to fix the sort order so that the EDO numbers sort properly? It's kind of annoying when 9edo is after 90edo through 99edo, etc. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 09:12, 6 August 2025 (UTC)