Talk:BSicon/Renaming

‎Former ABZ3: emph
← Older revision
Revision as of 13:08, 26 March 2013
Line 985:
Line 985:
 
::: YLSS, let me cite the most important part of your answer: ''"at least that's how I understood it"''
 
::: YLSS, let me cite the most important part of your answer: ''"at least that's how I understood it"''
 
::: Your explantion for the q-suffix is far more complicated as all other rules conc. BSicons! Most important, why left-to-right and not right-to-left? We just managed to have all icons seen in direction of travel, i.e. from top to bottom of the icon, and now they're proposing a complete new meaning? O yes, it wasn't me who proposed a new meaning, and this was nowhere officially introduced! That's why I will continue with the old and 100% consistent naming scheme! [[User:Axpde|'''a'''×'''p'''_de]][[User Talk:Axpde|^Hello!]] 12:34, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 
::: Your explantion for the q-suffix is far more complicated as all other rules conc. BSicons! Most important, why left-to-right and not right-to-left? We just managed to have all icons seen in direction of travel, i.e. from top to bottom of the icon, and now they're proposing a complete new meaning? O yes, it wasn't me who proposed a new meaning, and this was nowhere officially introduced! That's why I will continue with the old and 100% consistent naming scheme! [[User:Axpde|'''a'''×'''p'''_de]][[User Talk:Axpde|^Hello!]] 12:34, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
−
::::Well, I risk parroting, but I didn't really invent or propose it. Such an ''explanation'' coalesced inside my head from the whole lotsa talks I've read here, like that "q" means rotating 90 degrees etc. And since at least three persons agreed more or less with it (that is, Circeus, Tuválkin & me), I guess it ''is'' reasonable. Although yes, it isn't simple, so no bad feelings if we ''agree'' on something else. [[User:YLSS|YLSS]] ([[User talk:YLSS|talk]]) 12:51, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
+
::::Well, I risk parroting, but I didn't really invent or propose it. Such an ''explanation'' coalesced inside my head from the whole lotsa talks I've read here, like that "q" means rotating 90 degrees etc. And since at least three persons agreed more or less with it (that is, Circeus, Tuválkin & me), I guess it ''is'' reasonable. Although yes, it isn't simple, so no bad feelings if we '''agree''' on something else. [[User:YLSS|YLSS]] ([[User talk:YLSS|talk]]) 12:51, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 

 

 
:::The problem with "g" for "''geradeaus''" is that it is also the "g" for "''gegen''" and, while it may work for ABZs, it will come crashing down unexpectedly when applied to other kind of icons. We seen this kind of rickety cardhouse nomenclature fall apart before. -- [[User:Tuvalkin|Tuválkin]] [[User talk:Tuvalkin|✉]] 12:22, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 
:::The problem with "g" for "''geradeaus''" is that it is also the "g" for "''gegen''" and, while it may work for ABZs, it will come crashing down unexpectedly when applied to other kind of icons. We seen this kind of rickety cardhouse nomenclature fall apart before. -- [[User:Tuvalkin|Tuválkin]] [[User talk:Tuvalkin|✉]] 12:22, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Line 993:
Line 993:
 

 

 
:::(ec) That said, I do see the logic in your scheme as well, and TBH ''theoretically'' it would be superior - but only if we implement it at a far larger scale. It could go like that: we have several building blocks:
 
:::(ec) That said, I do see the logic in your scheme as well, and TBH ''theoretically'' it would be superior - but only if we implement it at a far larger scale. It could go like that: we have several building blocks:
−
:::{{bsq|STR|alt=g}}, {{bsq|STRq|alt=q}}, {{bsq|STRlf|alt=l}}, {{bsq|STRrf|alt=r}}, {{bsq|STRrg|alt=+l}}, {{bsq|STRlg|alt=+r}}, {{bsq|exSTR|alt=xg}}, {{bsq|exSTRlg|alt=+xr}} etc.
+
:::{{bsq|STR|alt=g}}, {{bsq|STRq|alt=q}}, {{bsq|STRlf|alt=l}}, {{bsq|STRrf|alt=r}}, {{bsq|STRrg|alt=+l}}, {{bsq|STRlg|alt=+r}}, {{bsq|STR2|alt=2}}, {{bsq|exSTR|alt=xg}}, {{bsq|exSTRlg|alt=+xr}}, {{bsq|exSTR+3|alt=+x3}}, etc.
 
:::and we compound them together to get what we need; only I would've used solely "STR" root then. Thus we would have:
 
:::and we compound them together to get what we need; only I would've used solely "STR" root then. Thus we would have:
 
:::{{bsq|STR|alt=STRg}}, {{bsq|ABZrf|alt=STRgr}}, {{bsq|ABZgl+xr|alt=STRgl+xr}} etc.
 
:::{{bsq|STR|alt=STRg}}, {{bsq|ABZrf|alt=STRgr}}, {{bsq|ABZgl+xr|alt=STRgl+xr}} etc.
−
:::That would be really simple ''and'' algorithmic (!). However, I'm not yet clear on whether all "+"'s should (indeed could) be grouped together, as well as "x"'s. (Also, in this case I would've switched the semantics of "l" and "r" to mean left and right side of the screen.) [[User:YLSS|YLSS]] ([[User talk:YLSS|talk]]) 12:25, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
+
:::That would be really simple ''and'' algorithmic (a vital point indeed that we nearly lack). However, I'm not yet clear on whether all "+"'s should (could) be grouped together, as well as "x"'s. (Also, in this case I would've switched the semantics of "l" and "r" to mean left and right side of the screen, so that we completely get rid of "directions" and practise WYSIWYG.) [[User:YLSS|YLSS]] ([[User talk:YLSS|talk]]) 12:25, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:BSicon/Renaming&diff=93304170&oldid=93303517