Talk:72edo: Difference between revisions

re
TallKite (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
 
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 10: Line 10:


::: Are you talking about the number of digits in total- as in throughout the whole ratio?  Sorry, but most commas that are well known have ratios of at least three digits per single side of the ratio, so that would be unreasonable. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 01:12, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
::: Are you talking about the number of digits in total- as in throughout the whole ratio?  Sorry, but most commas that are well known have ratios of at least three digits per single side of the ratio, so that would be unreasonable. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 01:12, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
:::: Not the total number of digits, just the number of digits in the numerator. --[[User:TallKite|TallKite]] ([[User talk:TallKite|talk]]) 20:00, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
::::: In my opinion also a 8-digit (or <abbr title="9-digits would be better, in this case the numerator would start with 1 anyway">9-digit</abbr>) limit would look good in the comma table. See [[41edo#Commas]] for an example. The 10-digit limit was also in use for naming interval pages and redirect lemmas to them. Maybe also this could be changed? BTW: I think for finding a new consensus, we should move this discussion to a better place. --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 20:50, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
:::::: I like what you did with the 41edo table, --[[User:TallKite|TallKite]] ([[User talk:TallKite|talk]]) 22:17, 24 December 2020 (UTC)


: I heard these tables are generated by scala, aren't they? [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 05:54, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
: I heard these tables are generated by scala, aren't they? [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 05:54, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Return to "72edo" page.