[r-t] Blocks to be renamed as methods

Richard Johnston 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.

Richard Johnston

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list