Talk:Table of 159edo Intervals

Formatting

Tbh I'm not fond of the current format of most such interval table pages.

1. With a lot of merged columns it looks messy and hard to read.
2. Some important higher-limit ratios are often obscured by simpler ratios in lower limit. That doesn't help to understand the structural characteristics of the temperament.

I suggest:

1. Never merge units even if empty.
2. All ratios under a certain criteria (which may vary by the complexity of the edo) should be present, despite the existence of simpler ones.

That'll make the interval table more similar to those in main edo pages, but each prime limit is in separate column, from which larger and higher-limit edos still benefit.

I think Aura has a good start. We might propagate that. FloraC (talk) 07:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

If I understand right: you are suggesting the use of regular columns (even if with empty cells)? --Xenwolf (talk) 11:48, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes. FloraC (talk) 12:13, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

It's good to see that I've gotten a few things right in how I'm doing this chart. It is precisely to convey the structural characteristics of the temperament that I have set certain criteria for the inclusion of intervals in the chart, refusing to use intervals with too great of a margin of error both in absolute and relative terms. (reposted by --Aura (talk) 03:34, 17 September 2020 (UTC))

I've changed my mind. The table looks clean now because it's not completely filled. But if you do an exhaustive search as I did in Table of 198edo intervals, you'll see how messy it is and how a lot of them are unuseful. That's why I decided to remove them and now this version looks much better to me. FloraC (talk) 07:19, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Well, in that case my comments in Talk:Table of 198edo intervals#The " meaning will also apply here. --Xenwolf (talk) 12:30, 30 November 2020 (UTC)