Talk:Optimal patent val: Difference between revisions

Cmloegcmluin (talk | contribs)
terminology suggestion
Cmloegcmluin (talk | contribs)
Line 9: Line 9:
I've been thinking about this concept. It seems like vals are only intermediary here. The actual results, as evidenced by the tables, are not the patent vals per se, but the EDOs possessing them. So maybe "optimal patently-mapped EDO" would be a clearer name for this object. This would make it clear that it is the val which is patent by one concept, and the EDO which is optimal by an entirely separate concept.
I've been thinking about this concept. It seems like vals are only intermediary here. The actual results, as evidenced by the tables, are not the patent vals per se, but the EDOs possessing them. So maybe "optimal patently-mapped EDO" would be a clearer name for this object. This would make it clear that it is the val which is patent by one concept, and the EDO which is optimal by an entirely separate concept.


Separately I am proposing "simple" as an alternative for "patent", so even better would be "optimal simply-mapped EDO", if you agree with the reasons for simple over patent.
Separately I am proposing "simple" as an alternative for "patent", so even better would be "optimal simply-mapped EDO", if you agree with the reasons for simple over patent. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 22:41, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Return to "Optimal patent val" page.