[r-t] Blocks to be renamed as methods
johnstonrh at amen.org.uk
Fri Apr 21 08:41:48 UTC 2017
> Iain Anderson wrote:
> > Throw the obscure classifications away. They are only there because
> > historically we haven't liked the idea of having methods that have no
> > classification. So we have made up some artificial ones.
In normal life, things don't get classified into groups until there
are enough examples of things people both want and use to reveal a
sensible characterisation. In the meantime they are just one-offs.
In the past the MC has often had just one or two examples of
something new, which very often doesn't catch on, and yet the
obsession with classifying has resulted in great efforts at
classification, with no consequence other than to tarnish MCs
All that is needed is a residual category of "not (yet) classified".
Some innovations may turn out to be important and then do eventually
get a classification characteristic and corresponding label, whilst
the rest won't ever get classified.
More information about the ringing-theory