[r-t] Blocks to be renamed as methods

[Graham John]

On 20 April 2017 at 15:35, Don Morrison <dfm at ringing.org> wrote:

> I've been thinking a little further on this. And it seems to me there is
> little difficulty. As near as I can tell the whole, existing classification
> scheme seems to me to hold together apart from one, or possibly two, nits.

Yes, I believe it does. The only aspect that is rather unwieldy is the
default hunt class of Hybrid, which means that too many one lead
methods with essentially no real structure end up as being Little
Hybrid methods. A similar problem occurs with some of the link
methods, such as Down Differential Little Hybrid Maximus, where the
omission of "Little Hybrid" or even its replacement with Block (as a
proper class) would be an improvement.

> One nit is that according to the current scheme all single lead methods will
> be categorized as differential hunters (an awful name -- do they chase after
> infinitesimal foxes?), which doesn't seem right.

Yes, "the number of leads is not the same as the number of working
bells" wording would need amending as all the bells are hunt bells, so
clearly they are not differential.

Graham