Talk:Direct approximation: Difference between revisions
| Line 173: | Line 173: | ||
::: 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) | ::: 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) | ||
:::: FWIW I prefer "a/b is mapped to [x, y, ...]" where a/b is the interval and [x, y, ...] are the coordinates in the tempered space of the temperament. In other words, "mapped" already by default implicates a regularity to me if you don't specify that it's a "direct mapping". For example [[32/27]] is mapped to 285{{cent}} in [[80edo|80et]]. --[[User:Godtone|Godtone]] ([[User talk:Godtone|talk]]) 09:33, 27 May 2024 (UTC) | |||