Template talk:Infobox ET: Difference between revisions
→Consistency level: new section |
re |
||
| Line 161: | Line 161: | ||
:::::::: Looks alright to me. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 11:06, 18 December 2020 (UTC) | :::::::: Looks alright to me. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 11:06, 18 December 2020 (UTC) | ||
:::::::: Update: see [[#Reduce parameters]]. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 12:56, 7 October 2021 (UTC) | |||
I just removed all the disputable parameters. I carefully moved all the data entries to a better spot on the EDO page. Example compositions got moved to "Introductory Materials". Important MOSes got moved to "Rank Two Temperaments". Common uses and subgroups got deleted. I considered working the common uses into the theory section, but they just seemed so arbitrary. Every edo has a thousand uses. I didn't do anything with the intro section. --[[User:TallKite|TallKite]] ([[User talk:TallKite|talk]]) 07:41, 18 December 2020 (UTC) | I just removed all the disputable parameters. I carefully moved all the data entries to a better spot on the EDO page. Example compositions got moved to "Introductory Materials". Important MOSes got moved to "Rank Two Temperaments". Common uses and subgroups got deleted. I considered working the common uses into the theory section, but they just seemed so arbitrary. Every edo has a thousand uses. I didn't do anything with the intro section. --[[User:TallKite|TallKite]] ([[User talk:TallKite|talk]]) 07:41, 18 December 2020 (UTC) | ||
| Line 176: | Line 178: | ||
I think it's enough to specify the ''fifth'' since the parameters ''M2'', ''m2'', and ''A1'' are not independent (see [[diatonic range]]). Also the sizes could be calculated by the template or a module. What do you think? --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 22:12, 11 June 2021 (UTC) | I think it's enough to specify the ''fifth'' since the parameters ''M2'', ''m2'', and ''A1'' are not independent (see [[diatonic range]]). Also the sizes could be calculated by the template or a module. What do you think? --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 22:12, 11 June 2021 (UTC) | ||
:Yes, especially as they don't make sense for nondiatonic edos such as 13 or 16. Maybe specify the other parameters for diatonic edos but not for nondiatonic edos. Yes, they could be computed. [[User:Inthar|Inthar]] ([[User talk:Inthar|talk]]) 22:17, 11 June 2021 (UTC) | : Yes, especially as they don't make sense for nondiatonic edos such as 13 or 16. Maybe specify the other parameters for diatonic edos but not for nondiatonic edos. Yes, they could be computed. [[User:Inthar|Inthar]] ([[User talk:Inthar|talk]]) 22:17, 11 June 2021 (UTC) | ||
:: The sharpness is an important piece of information that I find really handy. That's why I've always argued for ''semitones (A1:m2)''. It saves a line. Semitones are also helpful in that they are the basic building blocks for 12edo users. Chromatic semitone and diatonic semitone are established terms long before xen practice. And cent values still can be shown along with step numbers. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 12:56, 7 October 2021 (UTC) | |||
== Consistency level == | == Consistency level == | ||
I'd like this to be present in the infobox because it quickly captures how the edo is likely to be used (in an RTT way or in an JI agnostic way). It's present in the theory section of basically every edo, often for the purpose I just mentioned. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 21:40, 5 October 2021 (UTC) | I'd like this to be present in the infobox because it quickly captures how the edo is likely to be used (in an RTT way or in an JI agnostic way). It's present in the theory section of basically every edo, often for the purpose I just mentioned. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 21:40, 5 October 2021 (UTC) | ||
Added diamond consistency and diamond monotonicity. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 12:56, 7 October 2021 (UTC) | |||