[r-t] Spliced Cinques & Max

[edward martin]

On 23 September 2010 22:29, Mark Davies <mark at snowtiger.net> wrote:
> RAS writes,
>
>> This all strikes me as rather silly.
>
> It's an inability to understand the round block, isn't it. Which is indeed
> rather silly, because round blocks are at the heart of all our ringing
> ("shall begin and end in rounds"). The CC recognise that a method started at
> a different change is still the same method, but they don't continue this
> thinking to the composition.
>
> Basically, any good property of a method or composition should be invariant
> under rotation. I could mention changes of method. ;-)
>
> MBD

A round block starting from point 'A' and finishing at point 'A' is
easily understood; but a round block starting at 'A' and ending at
'B', is that not still a round block?
If not then exclude all round at hand blocks of Grandsire, Stedman
etc., also round at snap in TB ringing.
This is allowed when points 'A' and 'B' happen to be rounds but not if
rounds is contained elsewhere? I mean start say from rounds in Stedman
and finish with say rounds in Littleport, there is no completion of
method round blocks yet it is from rounds to rounds. Slide this along
a few rows and you would be beginning and ending at unconventional
method starts...(Ought I go back to lurking?)
Eddie