While a ~91% error is a ~91% error...

[Erlich]
> We're talking about approximations in 144-tET, where no
> approximation can possibly be more than 4.17 cents off.
> In that context, the approximation of a scale with a
> max error of 3.79 cents is certainly not special.

[Monzo:]
>Oh, OK... that's a different viewpoint than the angle
>I was seeing it. I can buy that line of reasoning.

While this viewpoint is certainly 'correct...' I think as a "line of
reasoning" it both separates 144-tET from a/its notational context, and
fails to acknowledge or demarcate any sort of practical distinctions
between the +/- 4&1/6thc max error in 144-tET, and say a ~91% error @ +/-
~27c in 1-tET, or a ~91% error @ +/- ~.05c in 1200-tET.

Dan