| Author |
Message |
|
Joined: December 22, 2007
Posts: 3600
Submissions: 99
Location: Hampton, Virginia USA
|
| Weave Theory Discussions on the Forums |
|
| Posted on Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:37 pm |
Link to Post:  |
|
The Weaves Library didn't just pop into existence one day to be what you see now. Weave "families" and other ways of organizing things is an ongoing process that will never be fully complete. The weaves library has been conceived, grown, and tended to by a handful of people. Between the time that MAIL started, February 15, 2002, and now, 9 years later, a small portion of the current 15,200+ members have made a significant contribution to what is contained there. Zlosk, lorenzo, sakredchao, David_Austin, Cynake, Blaise, Bative, Tesserex, Phong, Legba3, Narrina, and ElementalDragon are the names that instantly come to my mind when I think about it. (If I have left out anyone, it is an oversight and I sincerely apologize. There are also people who have made huge behind-the-scenes contributions that typically go unrecognized.) These people all spent their free time caring enough about the future of the weaves library to think about and openly discuss weave theory on the forums. We owe them a special gratitude for that contribution. It's not an easy one to make.
I have read and tried to understand most of the posts on the forums dealing with weave theory. I have learned many things by taking the time to do that. Predictably, I don't agree with every word that every person has written about it. Not a big surprise there. But, I do have some general observations concerning what leads to useful, fruitful weave theory discussion:
1. Be aware that others before you have probably had similar questions and have discussed them on the forums. Prior discussions have merit and relevancy even though they didn't take place recently.
2. Your post should contain either a question you are willing to receive multiple answers to and be willing to discuss; or it should contain a statement of opinion that you are willing to receive multiple replies to and be willing to discuss.
3. Leave ego out of the discussion. Questions and opinions about weave theory are not about how good it feels to have a weave with your name on it, or how bad it feels to have your weave rejected. It's not personal. It is about the long-term effects of how the library is organized and tended to. It's not just the here and now that is important. The future of the library after we are all long gone is what is important.
4. History has shown already that extreme or polar positions are unlikely to be useful in weave theory discussions. Neither an all-inclusive "every weave is sacred" position nor an all-exclusive "scorch the earth of new" position is particularly helpful. Somewhere in the middle is worth striving for. The only way to find out where that middle is, is for people to be willing to stick their necks out and have the discussion.
5. We are not all going to come to a peaceful conclusion that makes everyone happy. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't have the discussion to begin with. The best case scenario is that we discuss weave theory with hindsight, foresight, and logic. The worst case scenario is that all useful discussion ceases.
6. The fact is, the majority of the 15,000+ membership either do not understand or do not care one whit about weave theory or how things are organized here. They simply want the information to be here so they can use it. That's fine. There is nothing wrong with that. If fact, that's what it's for. However, it does not logically follow that this majority, by simple fact of sheer numbers, is the best choice as caretaker of the weaves library and its future. Which is why...
7. When all is said and done, the final decision is left to the weaves admin. All we can do as people who have an opinion on the subject and care to share it is be clear, logical, and respectful about it. It is up to the weaves admin to have his/her own opinion, be willing to explain that opinion openly and patiently, be willing to listen to reasoned discussion and take it into account, and then make the final decision.
|
|
|
Joined: March 3, 2002
Posts: 4372
Submissions: 79
Location: tres piedras, new mexico
|
|
|
Joined: December 22, 2007
Posts: 3600
Submissions: 99
Location: Hampton, Virginia USA
|
|
|
| Posted on Fri Feb 18, 2011 12:18 am |
Link to Post: |
|
Thank you for the links sakredchao! I started on a link list but discovered it's almost a full time job now with all the relevant discussions that exist. I haven't given up though. 
If anyone finds a weave theory discussion that they found helpful, please feel free to link it here. A short title or description like chao provided would be very helpful too.
|
|
|
Joined: March 3, 2002
Posts: 4372
Submissions: 79
Location: tres piedras, new mexico
|
|
|
| Posted on Fri Feb 18, 2011 4:36 am |
Link to Post: |
|
if anyone posts a link, i (or someone like me) can edit it into my post above. it would be -great- to have the second post in this thread be a semi-comprehensive link list.
it's funny to look back at those threads. i was asked today if an article referenced in one of those threads on "advanced theory" ever got written. i think that was the 2-1 chain images that tess rendered. funny how what is advanced one year is basic knowledge a few years later.
PSA: remember to stretch.
3.o is fixing everything. |
|
|
Joined: August 10, 2005
Posts: 7026
Submissions: 294
|
|
|
Joined: January 21, 2004
Posts: 1016
Submissions: 26
Location: Gadsden, AL
|
|
|
| Posted on Fri Feb 25, 2011 7:24 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
This is not at all an advanced topic (in fact it's one of *the* most basic concepts of weave theory) but for anyone who is confused about the whole "Through Eye" or "Around Eye" thing, I wrote an article about it here. Feel free to check it out and see if it provides any insights on the technical side of weave construction and classification.
For some people it might be sufficiently descriptive to say "the ring goes through the ring and then another ring goes through the ring"; for others it might be more helpful to say "the ring goes through the eye formed by the other two rings". As ever, your mileage may vary.
-phong
|
|
|
Hexenkind
 [ Voice ]
Joined: July 11, 2010
Posts: 75
Submissions: 1
Location: Wilseyville,California, USA
|
|
|
| Posted on Fri Feb 25, 2011 8:40 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
Is there a possibility of moving all of the Theory threads into a new section of the boards? I know that it might be a lot of work but it might help orginizing it better.
we all walk to the same end, no matter what path we follow |
|
|
Joined: April 02, 2008
Posts: 1840
Submissions: 27
Location: Lincoln, NE
|
|
|
| Posted on Sat Feb 26, 2011 3:35 am |
Link to Post: |
|
Actually I know that DL is looking at a tagging system so we will be able to have a theory, history... tag so they can be found easier. Thanks for the article Phong even if it is an advanced topic it provides a good start for people. Thanks
Once you stop learning, you stop living, so...
Ask questions.
Try new things.
Share what you know.
MailleCode V2.0 T5.3 R4.4 E0.0 Feur MFe.sBr Wg Cwb G.7-5.1 I3.1-11 N20.5 Pj Dcdjt Xa1w2 S08 |
|
|
Joined: March 3, 2002
Posts: 4372
Submissions: 79
Location: tres piedras, new mexico
|
|
|
| Posted on Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:04 am |
Link to Post: |
|
| Daemon_Lotos wrote: | I've long wondered whether magemaille existed... Though I didn't know what it was called at the time, or I wouldn't have wondered.
We have European 4 in 1... It is the basic European Family Base
We have Japanese 3 in 1... It is the Japanese Family Base
We have Half Persian 3 in 1... It is the lowest Persian Base that holds its shape.
We also have Trinitymaille, which is a European weave that acts like a Persian Weave... Or is it a Persian weave containnig the ring interactions of a European weave...
So is Magemaille the Japenese/European cousin of Trinity? The root of that Hybrid family? And if so, is there a Japanese/Persian cousin out there somewhere?
That's pretty much how I view things... |
well, i don't think that that you can properly call that interaction in magemaille "euro". it looks like it might be euro, but there is no TE interaction.
i will call this interaction "mage" for lack of anything more descriptive.
magemaille is mage / japanese.
european 4-1 is mage / euro(TE)
i would say there is a mage / persian weave out there. this is one of the weaves i was trying to draw out with my thread about filling in the holes.
we probably already have a mage/spiral submission, we just haven't identified it as such yet.
this is not flat is mage / euro
http://www.mailleartisans.org/weaves/weavedisplay.php?oldkey=96
is there a stable pure-mage weave?
PSA: remember to stretch.
3.o is fixing everything. |
|
|
Joined: January 21, 2004
Posts: 1016
Submissions: 26
Location: Gadsden, AL
|
|
|
| Posted on Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:29 am |
Link to Post: |
|
I'd call the connections in magemaille more closely Japanese or Invert than Euro or Persian. There are no eyes to go through or around.
-phong
|
|
|
Joined: March 3, 2002
Posts: 4372
Submissions: 79
Location: tres piedras, new mexico
|
|
|
| Posted on Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:49 am |
Link to Post: |
|
invert is, perhaps, another description for what i am calling "mage".
phong, to you, is invert 2 rows? or is invert not expressed until you reach 3 rows? the |_| of gridlock.
at the very least they are closely related.
PSA: remember to stretch.
3.o is fixing everything. |
|
|
Joined: January 21, 2004
Posts: 1016
Submissions: 26
Location: Gadsden, AL
|
|
|
| Posted on Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:57 am |
Link to Post: |
|
Gridlock isn't the best example, because it combines Invert and TE connections. A pure Invert weave is Inverted Round. The invert connection at the most basic level requires 3 rings in 2 rows (like Euro 4-1's 2 eye rings and the TE ring) but the stable unit requires 5 rings in 3 rows (like the E4-1 fivelet). But I needs mah sleep, so I'll try to explain more on it tomorrow.
-phong
|
|
|
Joined: March 3, 2002
Posts: 4372
Submissions: 79
Location: tres piedras, new mexico
|
|
|
| Posted on Fri Mar 04, 2011 4:01 am |
Link to Post: |
|
inverted round and gridlock both have that same 3 row |_| cross section.
from what i understood you explain, the invert interaction does not happen until the third row is expressed. the 3rd ring in the 3 ring model, and the 4th and 5th in the 5 ring model. (i agree with this.)
you are thinking in terms of "down the ribbon" think along the other grain.
the grain that runs the length of windmill. the perpendicular grain to boxchain on a sheet of euro4. the interaction running the length of IR.
this is the same interaction that we are discussing in magemaille.
the invert interaction seems to be composed of a mage interaction off of a mage interaction.
to me the mage interaction is a root interaction, much like the render of 2-1 chains tesserex made.
PSA: remember to stretch.
3.o is fixing everything. |
|
|
Joined: April 02, 2008
Posts: 1840
Submissions: 27
Location: Lincoln, NE
|
|
|
| Posted on Thu Mar 10, 2011 7:22 pm |
Link to Post: |
|
Just for some more good theory links I will submit this one.
mobius vs. spiral - http://www.mailleartisans.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=16214
Once you stop learning, you stop living, so...
Ask questions.
Try new things.
Share what you know.
MailleCode V2.0 T5.3 R4.4 E0.0 Feur MFe.sBr Wg Cwb G.7-5.1 I3.1-11 N20.5 Pj Dcdjt Xa1w2 S08 |
|
|
Joined: April 02, 2008
Posts: 1840
Submissions: 27
Location: Lincoln, NE
|
|
|
| Posted on Mon Mar 21, 2011 3:19 am |
Link to Post: |
|
I am working on understanding and identifying the new mage category. If I am understanding this correctly Alternating Allure Sheet would be an example of this mage category. Correct?
Sorry if that seems obvious I am trying to learn this theory aspect of maille and I appreciate your patience with me.
Once you stop learning, you stop living, so...
Ask questions.
Try new things.
Share what you know.
MailleCode V2.0 T5.3 R4.4 E0.0 Feur MFe.sBr Wg Cwb G.7-5.1 I3.1-11 N20.5 Pj Dcdjt Xa1w2 S08 |
|
|
