TallKite
Joined 19 September 2018
Line 259: | Line 259: | ||
::: Finally, I see that you omit the prime 2 column. I know the information in that column is pretty redundant, but IMO it logically belongs there, and it would make the table more understandable to newbies. --[[User:TallKite|TallKite]] ([[User talk:TallKite|talk]]) 08:38, 10 December 2020 (UTC) | ::: Finally, I see that you omit the prime 2 column. I know the information in that column is pretty redundant, but IMO it logically belongs there, and it would make the table more understandable to newbies. --[[User:TallKite|TallKite]] ([[User talk:TallKite|talk]]) 08:38, 10 December 2020 (UTC) | ||
:::: I agree to you in all the points. I'd use ''M2'', ''m2'', and ''A1'' and link the combination of all three to a page we just need a good name for. I'd suggested to name this like "Tonal properties of EDOs", because it's about tonality in general and [[tone]] sizes specifically. FloraC disagreed about the neologism "tonal property". The common use of ''degree'' was unknown to me, so "steps" (sometimes "edomapping") would be good, I even thought of just "#" in interval tables. I also outright ''hate'' these phone numbers. We should have both: 1) easy to understand numbers in tables (sometimes, only in a few cases, higher precision values); 2) easy to understand pages (and lots of links to them) that explain how to calculate all this to deliberate precision. The precision in the interval tables probably needs a broader discussion: I recall that there were users who wished the current precision, I personally would agree with <code>%+.1f</code> for cents and <code>%+.0f</code> for relative cents. The 2-column for the prime interval tables is already built in (by passing an optional third <code>+2</code> argument to the module function, see 3rd table in [[:dev:User:Xenwolf/SandBox#Test Module:primes_in_edo]]). Seems now I answered all your questions; if not, please let me know. --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 09:14, 10 December 2020 (UTC) |