Re: Tuning-Math archive - first

HI Kurt,

> The encyclopedia index frame can be run through a filter that will produce
> term/url pairs. Have you already done this or was your example below
> hard-coded? Some of the terms will be multi-word. Can you handle that?
> This is not a 100% solution but will be pretty good.

My example is hard coded as you put it. When you write the entry
you include the url to the relevant encyclopedia entry.

> > Well if Joe wanted to do it all of course,
> > but it is such a big undertaking...

> The encyclopedia is already close to having a short definition at the top
> for many words, and perhaps that case could be recognized and the content
> incorporated in the filtering process.

I thought of that, but no, it doesn't work. Well some of them could almost be used as a
dictionary if a bit too wordy for such, but some just won't work at alll.
Let's see if I can explain better with some examples.

Look at this one for example:

Aeolian:
One of the standard Western modes. The name "aeolian" was not used by the ancient Greeks , and so it originated with medieval
theorists who misunderstood the Greek treatises.

The diatonic genus of the aeolian mode equates to the "8ve"-species from A to A, in ascending order thus ("t" means "tone" in the
sense of "whole-tone", and "s" means semitone):

A B C D E F G A
t s t t s t t

That's fine for a first paragraph of an encyclopedia but it is no good
at all for a dictionary. There would be really no point in putting
those first two paragraphs into a little window frame in the archive
- the diagram would be out of sight - and the user would need to
scroll down a couple of paragraphs - or better - open
up the complete page to find out what an Aeolian mode is if they don't
know it already.

Extracting a dictionary type entry from the same page:

Aeolian:
Natural minor scale. Example: A B C D E F G A, steps: t s t t s t t (t = tone, s = semitone)

Do you see how it is a different format - encyclopedias are no good
as dictionaries because they aren't written as such. If you
want to know the meaning of a word you look up a dictionary.
If you want to know more about it and want to explore it in
depth, you look up an encyclopedia.

This isn't a criticism of the encyclopedia
- you simply don't expect to be able to
use encyclopedias to look up the
meanings of words. You have to do it that way right now.
but a dictionary would make everything much easier.

Similarly

Diesis:

Diesis is a term which has been used so variously at different times in history that it requires 7 separate definitions here.

When the term is unqualified, it generally is meant to refer to the ratio 128:125 = [2 3 5]^[7 0 -3] = ~41.05885841 (~411/17) cents,
as described in definition #4 below.
...

Extracting a dictionary type definition:

Diesis:
Usually 125/128 - the interval between 2/1 and (5/4) * (5/4) * (5/4).

More generally, a small interval of about a quarter tone between low number ratios or products of ratios such as the undecimal
diesis 33/32, which is the interval between 11/8 and 4/3.

This one is more like a dictionary entry already but too loquacious for such:

Accidental:

A symbol placed before a note-head in musical notation, or after a letter-name in a text description, which indicates some
intonational change or adjustment relative to the tuning of the plain note or letter-name. The name "accidental" is derived from the
fact that these notes are felt to lie outside the regular diatonic scale.

The standard musical accidentals are:

symbol name effect

# sharp raise 1 semitone
b flat lower 1 semitone
x double-sharp raise 2 semitones (sometimes written ##)
bb double-flat lower 2 semitones

There is also a "natural", which cancels the effect of a previously given accidental, whether that accidental occurs in a particular
instance or in the key-signature.

Accidental:

Symbol used to modify pitch. Normally # raises the pitch by a semitone and b lowers it
x or ## = double sharp, bb = double flat. A natural cancels the effect of the
previous accidental. Many microtonal accidentals - see encyclopedia.

Except, if we assume that the reader already knows about
music notation as is rather reasonable for a reader
of the tuning list, it might be better as:

Accidental:
Symbol used to modify pitch such as # or b.
Two versions of sixth tone notation are in use:
+ - ++ -- +++ ---
Maneri / Sims: ^ v > < ] [
HEWM (newest): - + < > v ^

The recent Saggital system is designed for use with any
tuning. Many other notations in common use for
various tunings - see the <SCALA help> for
the most comprehensive list available.

Well - that is already rather long for a dictionary
entry - maybe it can be made a bit shorter
with some more work (it has already taken me half
an hour or so to write to get it down to as
few words as that).

If the user needs to scroll down, but only by one
paragraph (or to resize the definition window to
show another paragraph) it may still be acceptable.
Some just can't be done in two sentences, but
where possible they should and not more than
four or five as the upper limit.

Anyway - do you see now why I think a dictionary is a different beast.

It would be useful for Monz's encyclopedia too - I know the entries are
all cross-linked, but if you try and read it that way you
end up going down and down through maybe two or three nesting levels
to find out what something means, then you keep going back up and
down again so it takes a while to read a topic if you aren't
famliar with its terms yet.

So, if one had a dictionary to hand as well then it would be
a much faster read.

Once you know what an Aeolian mode is, or what a diesis is,
if you want to follow it up further you can then click
on the link at the end of the dictionary entry to get
to the encyclopedia, or other links if the author
of the entry mentions other pages as well
- no reason why it should only link to
the encyclopedia for every single entry
though it makes sense to link to it when
there is an encyclopedia entry available or
the term.

Do you see now why I feel a dictionary is needed
in addition to an encyclopedia?

Robert

Hi there,

Sorry should be:

"
Accidental:
Symbol used to modify pitch such as # or b.
Two versions of sixth tone notation are in common use:
+ - ++ -- +++ ---
Maneri / Sims: ^ v > < ] [
HEWM (newest): + - > < ^ v

The recent Saggital system is designed for use with any
tuning. Many other notations in common use for
various tunings - see the <SCALA help> for
the most comprehensive list available.
"

BTW if we did this collaboratively, one
way would be to simply have a single Wiki page
somewhere for the complete dictionary.

Then anyone could edit that page to
update it and add more definitions
or correct typos or miunderstandings
and there would be no problems
about several people defining the
same word at the same time
(apart from anyone without web
access to edit the page - they
could e-mail their entries
to anyone who does have it).

Robert

Hi there,

Also of course, should read "Twelfth tone"
- I was thinking of a sixth of a semitone

Robert

hi Kurt and Robert,

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Walker" <robertwalker@n...>
wrote:

> HI Kurt,
>
> Anyway - do you see now why I think a dictionary is a
> different beast.

hmmm ... this big thing started out once as a simple
"Dictionary of Tuning Terms". i guess i should have kept
that and made the Encyclopaedia a different thing,
instead of making the one grow into the other. oh well ...
too late to stop me now! ;-)

-monz

on 7/24/04 4:13 AM, Robert Walker <robertwalker@ntlworld.com> wrote:

> Do you see now why I feel a dictionary is needed
> in addition to an encyclopedia?

I can certainly see how it would be useful, but I don't agree it is needed
in order to make accelerated encyclopedia access useful.

In fact for my personal learning style the encyclopedia format has been
pretty much fine, and what I do is have the encyclopedia handy sometimes as
I'm reading emails. But sometimes its not handy enough, so I'm still quite
excited about the possibility of having the encyclopedia links working.

Meanwhile a separate dictionary project *is* a good thing, but I wouldn't
hold up one for the other.

Unfortunately the form of linking that is most useful might change when a
transition is made. With the encyclopedia being the only thing going,
float-over followed by click is less accessible than simply a click, and so
I'd vote for eliminating the extra step and having direct links from message
body to encyclopedia. Maybe. One reason why not is because a dictionary
project might start very soon in a small way and gradually grow. Another
reason why not is that the message may read better with no hyperlinks, at
least without underlined hyperlinks, though of course *that* is a style
sheet option. So anyway I'm undecided.

-Kurt

on 7/24/04 4:13 AM, Robert Walker <robertwalker@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>> The encyclopedia index frame can be run through a filter that will produce
>> term/url pairs. Have you already done this or was your example below
>> hard-coded? Some of the terms will be multi-word. Can you handle that?
>> This is not a 100% solution but will be pretty good.
>
> My example is hard coded as you put it. When you write the entry
> you include the url to the relevant encyclopedia entry.

Well anyway I'm still thinking about delivering you term/url pairs if you
are interested, so please clarify for me whether you can handle multi-word
"terms" and whether you think the "raw" approach I suggested above would be
worth doing.

Thanks!

-Kurt

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_54823.html#54828

> hi Kurt and Robert,
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Walker" <robertwalker@n...>
> wrote:
>
> > HI Kurt,
> >
> > Anyway - do you see now why I think a dictionary is a
> > different beast.
>
>
>
> hmmm ... this big thing started out once as a simple
> "Dictionary of Tuning Terms". i guess i should have kept
> that and made the Encyclopaedia a different thing,
> instead of making the one grow into the other. oh well ...
> too late to stop me now! ;-)
>
>
> -monz

***I don't feel this is a big problem. Most of the people who take
the time to look up terms would like to learn more about the topic
anyway. Just call it a tuning Dictionary/Encyclopedia and be done
with it...

JP

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Kurt Bigler <kkb@b...> wrote:

/tuning/topicId_54823.html#54852

> on 7/24/04 4:13 AM, Robert Walker <robertwalker@n...> wrote:
>
> > Do you see now why I feel a dictionary is needed
> > in addition to an encyclopedia?
>
> I can certainly see how it would be useful, but I don't agree it is
needed
> in order to make accelerated encyclopedia access useful.
>

***I agree here with Kurt...

JP