[r-t] Principles

[Mark Davies]

GACJ writes, in reply to Ander,

>> So it is.  However, my Major example -123458-1238-1678-145678 does not
>> suffer from this problem.
>
> Yes, that is a very interesting example. I had convinced myself that this
> couldn't work without repeating the notation as in Philip's example.

I've forgotten what "winking up" means, but isn't this an example of it, 
and didn't someone else mention that as a general solution at the start 
of this discussion? Basically this is a four-bell principle, hence four 
leads is what we expect... ;-)

My Toyota Axioms classified methods based on the smallest repeating 
sub-unit of place notation, which I thought at the time meant I didn't 
need the extra condition in the definition of principle, but Ander's 
idea might put the lie to that.

I'm still trying to work out in my mind whether the treble and the two 
really do ring the same work in his method or not. Looking at the blue 
line they do, but structurally that is surely misleading. For instance, 
a 1458 call would only affect half the bells, and those bells are also 
the only ones who make a place in 4ths over an unchanging bell in 3rds. 
If I were ringing the method to handbells it would seem like there are 
two different sets of work, would it not?

MBD