Talk:Optimal ET sequence: Difference between revisions

Cmloegcmluin (talk | contribs)
Dave Keenan (talk | contribs)
Line 29: Line 29:
:::::: Alright, so now it's back to me. I agree with Dave and Fredg999 that we should change "Optimal GPV sequence" to "Optimal ET sequence". And I'll go even another step further: I think that "optimal" here can and should also be made to further capture a third idea, the one Dave pointed out: that these are ETs which support the given temperament. I think there's simply too much detail to this concept to capture it all explicitly in the name, and "optimal" does a suitable job at encapsulating all three of these ideas.
:::::: Alright, so now it's back to me. I agree with Dave and Fredg999 that we should change "Optimal GPV sequence" to "Optimal ET sequence". And I'll go even another step further: I think that "optimal" here can and should also be made to further capture a third idea, the one Dave pointed out: that these are ETs which support the given temperament. I think there's simply too much detail to this concept to capture it all explicitly in the name, and "optimal" does a suitable job at encapsulating all three of these ideas.
:::::: --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 19:11, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
:::::: --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 19:11, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
:::: I agree that "supporting" should be explicitly mentioned in any description of the requirements of the ETs in an "optimal ET sequence". [[User:Dave Keenan|Dave Keenan]] ([[User talk:Dave Keenan|talk]]) 20:46, 4 May 2023 (UTC)


== Sorted by complexity? ==
== Sorted by complexity? ==
Return to "Optimal ET sequence" page.