Talk:Patent val: Difference between revisions

Line 94:

::::::::: site:yahootuninggroupsultimatebackup.github.io "mapping"

::::::::: site:yahootuninggroupsultimatebackup.github.io "map"

::::::::: Of course most of the temperament data in the Xen Wiki was generated by Gene, so it is not surprising if it contained "map" as an abbreviation of "mapping". So I assume, when you say that switching to ''mapping'' from ''map'' is a relatively recent change, you are referring to someone having expanded these occurrences of "map" to "mapping". That would be a good thing, and it would open the way to defining "map" as synonymous with "val".

::::::::: In the Xen Wiki and Graham Breed's temperament finder and the tuning archives, the term "map" (and not "mapping") already consistently refers to an individual row of the form ⟨...]. This is in the case of a "tuning map", which maps from generators to cents. This is a map in "tuning space". By analogy, a val is therefore a map in "temperaments space", and so it would be perfectly consistent with existing terminology to refer to a val as a "temperament map" as opposed to a temperament mapping. We are merely proposing that an unqualified "map" should be assumed to be a temperament map, i.e. a val, not a tuning map. Or at least that when it is clear from the context that it is a temperament map, the qualifier "temperament" can be dropped. --[[User:Dave Keenan|Dave Keenan]] ([[User talk:Dave Keenan|talk]]) 16:29, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

::::::::: In the Xen Wiki and Graham Breed's temperament finder and the tuning archives, the term "map" (and not "mapping") already consistently refers to an individual row of the form ⟨...]. This is in the case of a "tuning map", which maps from generators to cents. This is a map in "tuning space". By analogy, a val is therefore a map in "temperaments space", and so it would be perfectly consistent with existing terminology, to refer to a val as a "temperament map" as opposed to a temperament mapping. We are merely proposing that an unqualified "map" should be assumed to be a temperament map, i.e. a val, not a tuning map. Or at least that when it is clear from the context that it is a temperament map, the qualifier "temperament" can be dropped. --[[User:Dave Keenan|Dave Keenan]] ([[User talk:Dave Keenan|talk]]) 16:29, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

@@ Line 94: / Line 94: @@
 ::::::::: site:yahootuninggroupsultimatebackup.github.io "mapping"
 ::::::::: site:yahootuninggroupsultimatebackup.github.io "map"
 ::::::::: Of course most of the temperament data in the Xen Wiki was generated by Gene, so it is not surprising if it contained "map" as an abbreviation of "mapping". So I assume, when you say that switching to ''mapping'' from ''map'' is a relatively recent change, you are referring to someone having expanded these occurrences of "map" to "mapping". That would be a good thing, and it would open the way to defining "map" as synonymous with "val".
-::::::::: In the Xen Wiki and Graham Breed's temperament finder and the tuning archives, the term "map" (and not "mapping") already consistently refers to an individual row of the form ⟨...]. This is in the case of a "tuning map", which maps from generators to cents. This is a map in "tuning space". By analogy, a val is therefore a map in "temperaments space", and so it would be perfectly consistent with existing terminology to refer to a val as a "temperament map" as opposed to a temperament mapping. We are merely proposing that an unqualified "map" should be assumed to be a temperament map, i.e. a val, not a tuning map. Or at least that when it is clear from the context that it is a temperament map, the qualifier "temperament" can be dropped. --[[User:Dave Keenan|Dave Keenan]] ([[User talk:Dave Keenan|talk]]) 16:29, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
+::::::::: In the Xen Wiki and Graham Breed's temperament finder and the tuning archives, the term "map" (and not "mapping") already consistently refers to an individual row of the form ⟨...]. This is in the case of a "tuning map", which maps from generators to cents. This is a map in "tuning space". By analogy, a val is therefore a map in "temperaments space", and so it would be perfectly consistent with existing terminology, to refer to a val as a "temperament map" as opposed to a temperament mapping. We are merely proposing that an unqualified "map" should be assumed to be a temperament map, i.e. a val, not a tuning map. Or at least that when it is clear from the context that it is a temperament map, the qualifier "temperament" can be dropped. --[[User:Dave Keenan|Dave Keenan]] ([[User talk:Dave Keenan|talk]]) 16:29, 6 October 2021 (UTC)