[r-t] Adjacency in Extension

[Andrew Johnson]

>but then compound things add an additional “clause” that requires the 
class of a method to be preserved in the preferred extension so that a 
less good (to the naked eye, at least) extension could end up carrying the 
name forward to higher numbers.

Given the existing partition of Treble Bob, Delight and Surprise it is 
going to be hard to fix that without naming becoming a free-for-all. If 
you forget the idea of class then the class becomes part of the name, so 
you might want XYZ Treble Bob Minor to extend to XYZ Treble Bob Major, 
even though it is would have technically been a 'Surprise' or 'Delight' 
method, but then can clash with possible extensions of XYZ Surprise Minor.

I think the TB/Delight/Surprise problem occurs because at a treble 
cross-section a place may be considered as external, and so to be 
preserved as external, or as a place relative to the treble, which happens 
to be at the front or back. Once you extend further all is clear, but 
contracting down gives the ambiguity.

Naming is man-made, but doesn't imply this value free, or everyone's 
opinion is equally valid. It is useful and desirable that extensions of 
Plain Bob, Cambridge Surprise, Yorkshire Surprise (on even numbers) have 
the same name on different stages as there are useful rules for ringing 
them on different numbers. Therefore a total free-for-all is not 
desirable. It is the desire to give methods on different stages the same 
name when things are not so clear which is the problem. Allowing someone 
to name an extension with the same name as a earlier stage when the 
extension is only approximate then makes other people think this is the 
'true' extension and it gets an unjustified boost in popularity. Perhaps 
we should have more restrictive rules so that the same name is only given 
when there is a clear and obvious extension. There will of course still be 
choices in how to extend methods - for example Norwich Surprise Minor:
http://www.ringing.org/method/?notation=x34x4x2x3x34x1%2C6&stage=6
has been extended as
http://www.ringing.org/method/?notation=x34x4x2x3x34x3x34x1%2C8&stage=8
but could have been extended as
http://www.ringing.org/method/?notation=x34x4x256x36x34x58x56x1%2C8&stage=8

--
Andrew Johnson





Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU