[r-t] Method extension

Philip Saddleton pabs at cantab.net
Fri Apr 24 15:18:10 UTC 2015

On Thu, April 23, 2015 19:47, Philip Earis wrote:
> However, I think PABS' approach should be engaged with. My first
> challenge though is penetrating the quintessentially PABS language :-)  I
> may be missing some of the practical implications, but when PABS says eg
> the block length extends arithmetically but can be constant, how does
> this work in practice if either approach may be possible (eg with little
> plain minor methods)? To what extent does it depend on precedent with
> respect to previously-named methods? In principle could eg a "non-little"
> method (eg Oxford TB minor) extend to a little major / royal etc method
> (eg Barry Peachey's Dog)?

As I have presented it, yes. There are various further restrictions in the
current (G)B that some may feel ought to be kept. Implicit in the rest of
the existing Decision is that an external place remains external, so it is
not necessary to spell it out. If you wish to keep this, I think that the
way to do it is to make it an additional feature of the type of place,
similarly B.7 and B.8 could be features of a place. (I do not like the way
that these parts of the Decision require that a feature has to be retained
in the extension but it is not necessary for repetitions of a section to
have the same property - it ought to be all or nothing).

> And how does one prove an extension is (or
> isn't) infinite? Count to three?

I think it is only B.3-B.5 that make this difficult. I think a distinction
needs to be made between the construction and any additional restrictions
on the naming of methods (e.g. if the construction produces a method in a
different class). I don't see a problem with proving that a construction
works infinitely, and if this is not a requirement something is needed to
say that the linear function relating the ends of a line at different
stages has to have a gradient between 0 and 1.

> In any case, please can he (or indeed anyone) give a few idiot-proof
> worked examples of how his system would work in practice?

when I have a bit more time.

> I'd
> particularly like to see examples with these methods:
> - An oft-rung treble-dodging minor method...lets say London Surprise
> Minor

There is an extension with PB lead heads to all even stages if you don't
require external places to remain external:


A more interesting example is Cambridge Minor, where possible
constructions include
Yorkshire 8, Albanian 10, Southwark 12 etc.
Pudsey 8, Solihull 10 etc.

> - A vanilla TD major method...Superlative, say

Extends to 12, 16 etc.

> - A simple plain method - something like St Clement's Minor (or indeed St
> Simon's doubles)

St Clement's
Ashbourne College

> - Inarguably intuitive extensions at any stage, which the current CC
> rules nevertheless massively fail with...let's say the method where the
> treble simply plain hunts to (n-1)th place, and similarly Ashford.
Ok. In these cases a worked example would be more useful as an extension
by an odd number of stages is possible and places initially in the same
change extend differently. Other cases where extension by an odd number of
stages is possible are:

Duffield Major to Caters:
Saturn Doubles to Major: 36-36.18
34.14.12 to 3.145.125


More information about the ringing-theory mailing list