Talk:159edo/Notation: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 202: | Line 202: | ||
::::: I think that works, but the question is whether or not the distinctions still work in the staff context. Also, the ends of the cross stroke need fixing, but we'll get to that later. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 19:21, 16 October 2020 (UTC) | ::::: I think that works, but the question is whether or not the distinctions still work in the staff context. Also, the ends of the cross stroke need fixing, but we'll get to that later. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 19:21, 16 October 2020 (UTC) | ||
::::: If 60-degree angles don't work as well, then we can reinstate the 45-degree angles, but regardless, the cross strokes still need to be thick like you have them now. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 19:25, 16 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
::: Oh, and I should also point out that for EDOs where the rastma is not tempered out, but the half-apotome also exists, (think [[318edo]]) the rastmic accidentals would not be used because 33/32 takes priority, and... well... because the half-apotome is not formed by tempering out the rastma in such EDOs. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 15:24, 16 October 2020 (UTC) | ::: Oh, and I should also point out that for EDOs where the rastma is not tempered out, but the half-apotome also exists, (think [[318edo]]) the rastmic accidentals would not be used because 33/32 takes priority, and... well... because the half-apotome is not formed by tempering out the rastma in such EDOs. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 15:24, 16 October 2020 (UTC) | ||