A temperament naming convention?

It seems to be that if a temperament in one prime limit has the same
TOP tunings of the primes it includes as the tunings in the next
higher prime limit, it ought to get the same name (I'm not suggesting
the converse.) From that point of view, I've already screwed up once,
with the meantone names.

5-limit meantone: [1201.698522, 1899.262910, 2790.257558]

septimal meantone: [1201.698521, 1899.262909, 2790.257556, 3370.548328]

Septimal meantone and 5-limit meantone both are simply "meantone"
under this naming convention.

The 11-limit 31&43, what I called "meantone", has a TOP tuning of
[1201.611156, 1899.198965, 2790.351234, 3371.044615, 4145.302457].
This would not necessarily get the name "meantone".

The 11-limit 31&50, which I called "meanpop", has a top tuning
[1201.698521, 1899.262909, 2790.257556, 3370.548328, 4150.346670].
Under the proposed convention, it should be called "meantone".

Should 31&50, with wedgie [1, 4, 10, -13, 4, 13, -24, 12, -44, -71],
be given the name "meantone" and some other name be found for 31&43,
with wedgie [1, 4, 10, 18, 4, 13, 25, 12, 28, 16]?

--- In tuning-math@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...>
wrote:
> It seems to be that if a temperament in one prime limit has the same
> TOP tunings of the primes it includes as the tunings in the next
> higher prime limit, it ought to get the same name (I'm not
suggesting
> the converse.) From that point of view, I've already screwed up
once,
> with the meantone names.
>
> 5-limit meantone: [1201.698522, 1899.262910, 2790.257558]
>
> septimal meantone: [1201.698521, 1899.262909, 2790.257556,
3370.548328]
>
> Septimal meantone and 5-limit meantone both are simply "meantone"
> under this naming convention.
>
> The 11-limit 31&43, what I called "meantone", has a TOP tuning of
> [1201.611156, 1899.198965, 2790.351234, 3371.044615, 4145.302457].
> This would not necessarily get the name "meantone".
>
> The 11-limit 31&50, which I called "meanpop", has a top tuning
> [1201.698521, 1899.262909, 2790.257556, 3370.548328, 4150.346670].
> Under the proposed convention, it should be called "meantone".
>
> Should 31&50, with wedgie [1, 4, 10, -13, 4, 13, -24, 12, -44, -71],
> be given the name "meantone" and some other name be found for 31&43,
> with wedgie [1, 4, 10, 18, 4, 13, 25, 12, 28, 16]?

Sounds somewhat reasonable to me . . .