Talk:159edo/Notation: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
:::: No problem, I'm still open to improvement. --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 20:59, 6 October 2020 (UTC) | :::: No problem, I'm still open to improvement. --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 20:59, 6 October 2020 (UTC) | ||
Okay, so, after what Kite said, and given my thoughts on the Rastma being a potential JI basis for the single step of 159edo, I'm thinking we ought to replace the dart glyphs entirely | Okay, so, after what Kite said, and given my thoughts on the Rastma being a potential JI basis for the single step of 159edo, I'm thinking we ought to replace the dart glyphs entirely- thus separating this system from the Ups and Downs notation system proposed by Kite- and use a different combining glyph to represent the Rastma as a single step of 159edo, with the double step and quadruple step of 159edo being represented by syntonic-modified accidentals that are further modified by the combining element representing the Rastma. On another note, I think we can relegate the Septimal comma symbols and 13-limit accidentals to being optional, that way, people who want to use a simpler version of this system can do so. If need be, we can always ask the people who make new versions of Helmholtz-Ellis notation to separate the syntonic comma modifiers from the other accidental symbols, and we can go from there. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 14:57, 7 October 2020 (UTC) | ||
== Kite's proposal for 159edo notation == | == Kite's proposal for 159edo notation == |