Talk:Porcupine extensions: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Re |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
: [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 15:00, 16 May 2025 (UTC) | : [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 15:00, 16 May 2025 (UTC) | ||
:: Negri is not extended the same way as tridecimal porcupine. Negri maps 16/13 to 5/4 (which only works because 5/4 is already flat). Tridecimal porcupine maps 16/13 to 6/5, which is not only worse but loses both simple neutral thirds to 6/5. In any case, 5/4 is usually sharp (or at least approximately just) in septimal porcupine, meaning neither mapping works well. --[[User:VectorGraphics|VectorGraphics]] ([[User talk:VectorGraphics|talk]]) 02:41, 17 May 2025 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 02:41, 17 May 2025
Decanonize tridecimal porcupine
Leriendil believes the current "tridecimal porcupine" should be decanonized in favor of porcupinefish, because tridecimal porcupine's mapping isn't even porky's best mapping of 13, let alone septimal porcupine's. -- VectorGraphics (talk) 20:25, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
- I disagree. Negri is extended the same way as tridecimal porcupine so there's a pattern.
- Porky is irrelevant for how undecimal porcupine should be extended.
- I'll sort this out with Leri.
- Negri is not extended the same way as tridecimal porcupine. Negri maps 16/13 to 5/4 (which only works because 5/4 is already flat). Tridecimal porcupine maps 16/13 to 6/5, which is not only worse but loses both simple neutral thirds to 6/5. In any case, 5/4 is usually sharp (or at least approximately just) in septimal porcupine, meaning neither mapping works well. --VectorGraphics (talk) 02:41, 17 May 2025 (UTC)