Talk:Tuning map: Difference between revisions
→2025-04-26 undo details: new section |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
As for the so-called "(subgroup) tuning map", the existing term is "(tempered-prime) tuning map". See [[Dave Keenan & Douglas Blumeyer's guide to RTT/Conventions for names, variables, units, and notations]]. Please do not impose idiosyncratic terms without discussing it when another term already exists. If someone reverts your edit, you should discuss instead of bluntly reinstating your own work which was just reverted. --[[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 19:21, 26 April 2025 (UTC) | As for the so-called "(subgroup) tuning map", the existing term is "(tempered-prime) tuning map". See [[Dave Keenan & Douglas Blumeyer's guide to RTT/Conventions for names, variables, units, and notations]]. Please do not impose idiosyncratic terms without discussing it when another term already exists. If someone reverts your edit, you should discuss instead of bluntly reinstating your own work which was just reverted. --[[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 19:21, 26 April 2025 (UTC) | ||
: Another good reason to just get rid of "val" anyway, since it's a nonsense term invented specifically for RTT. If you use linear form / map / covector (whichever you prefer) there is no problem. – [[User:Sintel|Sintel🎏]] ([[User_talk:Sintel|talk]]) 20:18, 26 April 2025 (UTC) | |||