[r-t] A date to pencil into your calendar
tjbarnes23 at gmail.com
Wed Sep 2 15:35:03 UTC 2015
On Sep 2, 2015 4:17 PM, "Chris02" <chris02 at shropshirelad.plus.com> wrote:
> Is my understanding correct that whole pull Plain Bob Doubles or Minor
could be rung in a peal? It would use the identity change and a standard
calling would produce a double extent. If so, I assume it would be called
Plain Place Doubles / Minor.
Yes, agree these two new methods could be rung in a peal and named under
this proposal. Also agree they would be "Place" methods. Obviously at
Triples and above, a large number of changes needs to be rung to overcome
falseness, so at higher numbers, ringing in whole pulls would generally be
a 'non-standard' performance under this proposal document.
> Also, is it intended to redo the bit on extension?
There's still a discussion in progress in the sub-group on whether the
extension wording in v6.2 is too loose. An alternative proposal is along
the lines that the MC maintains a collection of recognized extension
techniques, one of which 'should' be used in extending a method. If a
different technique is used, it should be submitted to the MC for potential
inclusion in the collection. The MC continues to retain a veto over
proposed new method names. This is still being fleshed out, but possibly
will be a topic to bring to a vote on r-t.
Another question we haven't yet tackled in the sub-group is how to handle
Doubles Variations in the proposal document.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ringing-theory