[r-t] Blue line (/grid) generators / Jump Changes

[Graham John]

PJE wrote:

> Please can someone modify or create code
> so that jump changes can be inputted? We
> need to agree on a common standard for
> notation, but that should be easy in
> comparison with some of the other
> recent debates we've seen...

I would be happy to incorporate this functionality into Composition Library
(yes, I know it has been a long time coming, but the web version is now
well advanced, and I hope to start a beta test later in the year).

Does someone already have a syntax for jump notation. Does it have to cope
with jumps of more than one place, or are paired place notations adequate
e.g. enclosed in parentheses?

Graham


On 21 March 2015 at 16:52, Philip Earis <pje24 at cantab.net> wrote:

> I use a variety of websites and apps to generate rows and view grids (and
> blue lines) of methods, including unrung new methods. The three main ones I
> use, each of which have their own comparative advantages, are:
>
> - Martin Bright's Boojum (http://boojum.org.uk/cgi-bin/line.pl)
>
> - Don Morrison's ringing.org (http://ringing.org/main/pages/method-search)
>
> - Ander Holroyd's MethodScript (
> https://www.math.ubc.ca/~holroyd/methscript/methscript.htm)
>
> Other resources exist, including the venerable Visual Method Archive (
> http://www.vismeth.co.uk/main.htm), the website www.ringingmethods.co.uk,
> and excellent apps like Simon Gay's iagrams (http://www.iagrams.co.uk),
> and Methodology. These are intended to display previously-rung methods.
>
> However, I can't find anywhere the functionality to generate and view
> methods with jump changes. Partly this is a consequence of the CC Methods
> Committee who choose not to document the previously-rung jump methods in
> their database (from which most blue line generators pull).
>
> Please can someone modify or create code so that jump changes can be
> inputted? We need to agree on a common standard for notation, but that
> should be easy in comparison with some of the other recent debates we've
> seen...
>
> It would also be helpful to document rung methods that have jump changes.
> I've certainly rung (in peals or extents) at least:
>
> Jump Stedman Doubles (4 different sixes)
> Mersey Ferry Minor
> Cambridge Jump Surprise Minor
> London Jump Surprise Minor
> Double Oxford Jump Minor
> Stedman Jump Triples (2 different sixes)
>
> And a few more methods casually, including the obvious cyclic jump (both
> jump up and jump down), and extended versions of some of the above on
> higher numbers.
>
> What other methods have been rung that include jump changes?
> _______________________________________________
> ringing-theory mailing list
> ringing-theory at bellringers.net
> http://bellringers.net/mailman/listinfo/ringing-theory_bellringers.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory/attachments/20150321/5bd6f5be/attachment-0004.html>