Talk:Direct approximation: Difference between revisions
Cmloegcmluin (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 163: | Line 163: | ||
:: It was interesting to find a separate case on the wiki where "direct mapping" and "consistent mapping" were used as terminology, in the context of some theory about tunings of temperaments (where mapping ''does'' apply). I found it on two wiki pages. Here those two pages are, if you're curious: | :: It was interesting to find a separate case on the wiki where "direct mapping" and "consistent mapping" were used as terminology, in the context of some theory about tunings of temperaments (where mapping ''does'' apply). I found it on two wiki pages. Here those two pages are, if you're curious: | ||
::* [[The Riemann zeta function and tuning#Interpretation of results: "cosine relative error"]] | |||
::* [[TOP tuning#TOP with "inconsistent" rational tuning extensions]] | |||
:: I was also interested to find a couple places where the author was using the term "consistent mapping" along with "direct mapping". I changed "direct mapping" to "direct approximation", but I hesitated to change "consistent mapping" to "consistent approximation". Unlike "direct approximation", the name "consistent approximation" is not self-explanatory; in fact, I would say it's a bit confusing. From what I could understand, what was meant by "consistent mapping" (and what would be meant by "consistent approximation") was this: the sum of the direct approximations of an interval's constituent odd harmonics (such as would be used in a check for [[consistency]] of an EDO). If you like, you may feel free to push for this terminology, but if so, I think it should be bolded and defined on the consistency page. I'm not so sure about it myself; it seems a bit strained. For now, I simply unpacked the meaning in both places: | :: I was also interested to find a couple places where the author was using the term "consistent mapping" along with "direct mapping". I changed "direct mapping" to "direct approximation", but I hesitated to change "consistent mapping" to "consistent approximation". Unlike "direct approximation", the name "consistent approximation" is not self-explanatory; in fact, I would say it's a bit confusing. From what I could understand, what was meant by "consistent mapping" (and what would be meant by "consistent approximation") was this: the sum of the direct approximations of an interval's constituent odd harmonics (such as would be used in a check for [[consistency]] of an EDO). If you like, you may feel free to push for this terminology, but if so, I think it should be bolded and defined on the consistency page. I'm not so sure about it myself; it seems a bit strained. For now, I simply unpacked the meaning in both places: | ||
::* https://en.xen.wiki/index.php?title=4th-octave_temperaments&type=revision&diff=145002&oldid=138306 | |||
::* https://en.xen.wiki/index.php?title=1984edo&type=revision&diff=145003&oldid=144911 | |||
:: --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 01:52, 25 May 2024 (UTC) | :: --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 01:52, 25 May 2024 (UTC) | ||
::: I agree ''conistent mapping'' isn't quite self-explanatory. I know it means the same as ''mapping with a val'', ''val mapping'', ''RTT mapping'' or whatever that describes the opposite of direct approximation. Personally I find ''val mapping'' clear enough, but if you don't like ''val'', and replace it with ''map'', you get ''map mapping'' which is absurd. So idk. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 08:12, 26 May 2024 (UTC) | |||