Talk:MOS naming: Difference between revisions
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
:: I do find "enlarged" and "reduced" appealing. Maybe "generating" can be used instead of "perfect". This would eliminate any need for a ''mos-'' prefix. | :: I do find "enlarged" and "reduced" appealing. Maybe "generating" can be used instead of "perfect". This would eliminate any need for a ''mos-'' prefix. | ||
:: The & and @ are supposed to be accidentals that are readable on a staff (when stylized) and distinct enough. [[User:Inthar|Inthar]] ([[User talk:Inthar|talk]]) 17:31, 13 April 2021 (UTC) | :: The & and @ are supposed to be accidentals that are readable on a staff (when stylized) and distinct enough. [[User:Inthar|Inthar]] ([[User talk:Inthar|talk]]) 17:31, 13 April 2021 (UTC) | ||
::: Thinking in terms of potential translations to other languages, and economizing on the syllables, maybe 'real/true'', ''general'', or just use ''gen'' itself as a word. | |||
::: On &/@ - that may be so, but so are +/- and Unicode support for stylizing inline text isn't coming anytime soon. I would strongly suggest A+/B- or */` (A*/`B). [[User:Ayceman|Ayceman]] ([[User talk:Ayceman|talk]]) 18:03, 13 April 2021 (UTC) | |||