duplicate weaves
View previous topic | View next topic >
Post new topic Reply to topic
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Weaves Discussion
   
Author Message

Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 602
Submissions: 15

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu May 03, 2018 9:06 am || Last edited by Karpeth on Fri May 11, 2018 6:26 pm; edited 4 times in total
Link to Post: Link to Post

TrenchCoatGuy wrote:
Karpeth wrote:
However, this was a copy error I didn't catch. It's true vs dense.


While the difference is tiny, there is one between Dense Byzantine Sheet and True Byzantine Sheet... The difference was pretty clearly described right in the description of Dense Byzantine Sheet.

Double Half Persian 6 in 1 Sheet's description seems misleading. The AR doesn't match the description at all for feasibility (smaller AR than the min AR base weave that it turns into a sheet). Nonetheless, the image supports that the grain is being pulled differently from Half Persian 3 Sheet 6 in 1.

Japanese 3 in 1 Supported is not based on Not Tao 3. Instead, it has both handedness of the "Not Tao" spiraling rings. As such, different from NT3 (Not Tao 3) Web.

This list that you're generating is getting more and more on the lines of "this weave is too similar to this other weave" than "the weave is a direct duplicate".
I'm rather surprised you haven't listed these:
Japanese 4 in 1 Paired Orbital Square Sheet is just Japanese 4 in 1 Paired Orbital Chain, which is just 4-sided TricyclePenguins.


Regarding true and dense: I’ve always read the dense part as referencing a different Byzantine weave. Since the image was of such low quality, it was very easy to miss. They are not duplicate. You are correct.

Regarding DHP6-1S, it seems to not be described correctly in any way, and the closest thing I could find was the classical Sheet. I brought it up since It’s Either a duplicate or a very wrong description, and I wasn’t completely sure.

Regarding J3-Sup Vs NT3W; the J3-1Sup image is quite blurry. If I missed anything, I would of course retract My opinion, but from What I could see in the supplied image, it looks just like NT3W.

And with origami, I could agree that it’s a more ”This is too similar”.

The reason I brought up origami, is that it seems to be lesser known; I should have put it within a more ”should we do anything” text.

I have not had a chance to go through the entire library, systematically, but i’ve gone through enough weaves to leave a lot of ”This is This”, but like like This”. If I were to add My own weaves, as you brought up, I would have had to put a lot more things on This list.

I’ll give you that I shouldn’t Edit My posts while feverish at 2 am. My last post holds the least value.

I’ll add one more though. While I couldn’t identify it perfectly, CMB leans towards Half Persian 6 in 1 Helix being a 4:2 Persian, meaning, that Half Persian 6 in 1 Unbalanced (4:2) would be the same.

I'll add my posts together, with status and classifications:

Proven Identical:
Staggered Half Persian 3-1 Sheet 6-1 and Half Persian 3 in 1 Sheet 6 in 1 (Staggered)
[weave=Half Persian 4 in 1 Unbalanced] and Half Persian 3+1 in 1
Half Persian 2+3 in 1 and Half Persian 5 in 1

Only differ by non-impacting ring size choice:
Pacman and Byzantine Variant

Discussion needed:
Rhinos Snorting Drano and Barrel.
Captive Inverted Round (Fluctuating) and Captive Inverted Round
Japanese 8 / 4 in 1 and Hodo
Ladder and Helm Chain
Tower of Scales and Half Persian 4 in 1.)
Ruby's Byz - Mandala I,Ruby's Byz - Mandala II & Byzantine Ringmaille
Origami and Celtic Visions
European 4 in 1 (Intertwined) and European 4 in 1/ 5 in 1
Rosemaille and 6 in 1 Net
Ash's Byzantine and Offset Byzantine and Flowered Byzantine
Shuriken-Bo and Kurumaken
Mageschain and Zymolisis Sheet
Feather Pen and Quill
Japanese Rain Chain, Half Persian Spiral,Dreadlock and Two-Way Spiral

Investigation Needed:
Half Persian 3 in 1 Column and Hilt Chain
Orbital Sheet, Thunderstorm and 2Di
Three Quarters Persian 6 in 1 and Three Quarters Persian or Four Quarters Persian
Raze Rope and Trinity Round
Half Persian 6 in 1 Helix And Half Persian 6 in 1 Unbalanced (4:2)

Debunked?
Double Half Persian 6 in 1 Sheet & Half Persian 3 Sheet 6 in 1
Japanese 3 in 1 Supported and NT3 (Not Tao 3) Web
Dense Byzantine Sheet and True Byzantine Sheet


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer. Fluent in c++.

Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 602
Submissions: 15

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu May 03, 2018 8:38 pm || Last edited by Karpeth on Tue May 08, 2018 8:48 am; edited 2 times in total
Link to Post: Link to Post

I don't have rings at hand; but I'd like some help with these:

While Japanese Rain Chain and Half Persian Spiral Seem to be closely related, to the point of them almost being the same thing, they clearly are not. However, Dreadlock and Two-Way Spiral seem to very close. It seems that one link is "off", but I'd like some input here.

In the same vein, Orbital Sheet, Thunderstorm and 2Di, all seem to share the same Idea, but I don’t have big enough rings to investigate right now.

It could be argued that European 4 in 1 (Intertwined) is a duplicate of European 4 in 1/ 5 in 1, But the description of both is not definitive on the matter.

I have a gripe with the pair of Rosemaille and 6 in 1 Net. They follow the exact same principle, which I would class as a design, not a weave. However, they have a small difference in how far the cores are apart. The concept of duplicate is hard to apply here, but I feel like someone more should opine here.

Three Quarters Persian 6 in 1 and Three Quarters Persian or Four Quarters Persian seem to be duplicates. The image quality is not perfect on either, but it looks like TQP6-1 is either a duplicate of TQP or FQP. Based on Common name usage, I’d argue that tqp6-1, while oldest, is the one that should be removed.

I am going to look into Raze Rope and Trinity Round in a few days. Anyone want to compare them beforehand, and take that off My hands, please post your results here.

It could be argued, that Ash's Byzantine and Offset Byzantine are the same, but That would also technically include Flowered Byzantine. I wouldn’t submit them, and the reason I bring them up here, is that they are extremely close in nature.

Shuriken-Bo and Kurumaken are topologically the same, but Jens Pind Linkage and Snake Skin are also topologically the same as other weaves.

in the same vein, but much closer in behaviour, are Mageschain and Zymolisis Sheet.

I believe this will be last on my list. I havn't looked closely, but Feather Pen states it's the same as Quill, and vice versa.


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer. Fluent in c++.

Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 602
Submissions: 15

Reply with quote
Posted on Tue May 08, 2018 6:25 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Reproducing Dreadlock shows that it’s intended as a duplicate of Half Persian Spiral. The weave image does not correspond fully, to the text, though.

The text implies that it’s a fully repeating pattern. The image however, shows, from the left, three units of Half Persian spiral, a Half Persian 3 in 1 link, Two Half Persian spiral, 1 HP3-1 and 1 HP Spiral; something not implied by the text.

Both, are therefore the {removed} version to the {removed} Japanese Rain Chain (left)

Two-Way Spiral could be marked as the {removed} version of the JRC (right), which is NSR.


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer. Fluent in c++.

Joined: August 30, 2008
Posts: 3064
Submissions: 20
Location: Burlington, ON, Canada

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed May 09, 2018 12:51 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

Karpeth wrote:
Both, are therefore the {removed} version to the {removed} Japanese Rain Chain (left)

Two-Way Spiral could be marked as the {removed} version of the JRC (right), which is NSR.


In the interest of some people taking issue with the use of gender orientation terms to refer to MAIL weaves, I’ve removed the usage.
If you’re curious, please message me and I can elaborate.



Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 602
Submissions: 15

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed May 09, 2018 8:18 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

Daemon_Lotos wrote:
Karpeth wrote:
Both, are therefore the {removed} version to the {removed} Japanese Rain Chain (left)

Two-Way Spiral could be marked as the {removed} version of the JRC (right), which is NSR.


In the interest of some people taking issue with the use of gender orientation terms to refer to MAIL weaves, I’ve removed the usage.
If you’re curious, please message me and I can elaborate.


This again...

Would you please inform me of terms allowed? We have them in our library, and I still hold it’s not gender terms...


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer. Fluent in c++.

Joined: August 30, 2008
Posts: 3064
Submissions: 20
Location: Burlington, ON, Canada

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed May 09, 2018 8:23 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Karpeth wrote:
Daemon_Lotos wrote:
Karpeth wrote:
Both, are therefore the {removed} version to the {removed} Japanese Rain Chain (left)

Two-Way Spiral could be marked as the {removed} version of the JRC (right), which is NSR.


In the interest of some people taking issue with the use of gender orientation terms to refer to MAIL weaves, I’ve removed the usage.
If you’re curious, please message me and I can elaborate.


This again...

Would you please inform me of terms allowed? We have them in our library, and I still hold it’s not gender terms...


Find a different term to describe what you want to convey.
In no way are the terms Cis or Trans acceptable here. I begrudgingly keep me finger out of the Weaves DB in terms of naming conventions, but you’ll note that most weaves using the terms have since been renamed.
What I can and will do, is moderate here.

Since you commented “This again...” you acknowledge it has been an issue before, and I ask you to learn from that, as well as this occurrence.

I understand what you’re attempting to convey, and I would encourage you, strongly, to find a better term to describe it.
If there isn’t one in existence yet, create one!



Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 602
Submissions: 15

Reply with quote
Posted on Wed May 09, 2018 10:04 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Daemon_Lotos wrote:
Karpeth wrote:
Daemon_Lotos wrote:
Karpeth wrote:
Both, are therefore the {removed} version to the {removed} Japanese Rain Chain (left)

Two-Way Spiral could be marked as the {removed} version of the JRC (right), which is NSR.


In the interest of some people taking issue with the use of gender orientation terms to refer to MAIL weaves, I’ve removed the usage.
If you’re curious, please message me and I can elaborate.


This again...

Would you please inform me of terms allowed? We have them in our library, and I still hold it’s not gender terms...


Find a different term to describe what you want to convey.
In no way are the terms Cis or Trans acceptable here. I begrudgingly keep me finger out of the Weaves DB in terms of naming conventions, but you’ll note that most weaves using the terms have since been renamed.
What I can and will do, is moderate here.

Since you commented “This again...” you acknowledge it has been an issue before, and I ask you to learn from that, as well as this occurrence.

I understand what you’re attempting to convey, and I would encourage you, strongly, to find a better term to describe it.
If there isn’t one in existence yet, create one!


As you are the one hindering the use of classical scientific words with no real ”bad” connotations, I believe the responsibility to find a different Word is yours.

Furthermore, creating a new term, would only decrease legibility.

Please, I implore you, what would you accept as a substitute?


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer. Fluent in c++.

Joined: August 05, 2010
Posts: 601
Submissions: 28
Location: Bar Harbor, ME, USA

Reply with quote
Posted on Thu May 10, 2018 11:24 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Karpeth wrote:
As you are the one hindering the use of classical scientific words with no real ”bad” connotations, I believe the responsibility to find a different Word is yours.

Furthermore, creating a new term, would only decrease legibility.

Please, I implore you, what would you accept as a substitute?


Interesting wording. I recommend re-reading the old thread... including this comment that I made. Using those terms caused substantial confusion, which ended up taking 4+ pages in a thread for some readers to understand.

They're not a good set of terms to use. In the exact same way that sinister and dexterous would not be good terms -- common usage is drastically different from the archaic definitions. If this was a crowd of chemists or physicists, I wouldn't hold this stance. Most readers in this forum don't have any background in science.


while(!project.isFinished())
project.addRing();
// Maille Code V2.0 T7.1 R5.6 Eo.n Fper MFe.s Wsm Caws G0.8-1.6 I2.4-8.0 Pn Dcdejst Xw1 S07

Joined: March 26, 2002
Posts: 1895
Submissions: 574
Location: Chainmailland, Chainmailia

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri May 11, 2018 1:38 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Will these items require renaming then?

http://www.mailleartisans.org/weaves/weavedisplay.php?key=1043
http://www.mailleartisans.org/weaves/weavedisplay.php?key=1042


Chainmailbasket.com (2019-01-01) - 376 + 79

Joined: August 30, 2008
Posts: 3064
Submissions: 20
Location: Burlington, ON, Canada

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri May 11, 2018 6:06 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Chainmailbasket_com wrote:
Will these items require renaming then?

http://www.mailleartisans.org/weaves/weavedisplay.php?key=1043
http://www.mailleartisans.org/weaves/weavedisplay.php?key=1042


Those two come CLOSEST to the technical use of Cis as it appears in chemistry use... But in an ideal world, yes... A rename would be good.

Karpeth wrote:
As you are the one hindering the use of classical scientific words with no real ”bad” connotations, I believe the responsibility to find a different Word is yours.

Furthermore, creating a new term, would only decrease legibility.

Please, I implore you, what would you accept as a substitute?


Basically either a term specifically created for chainmail / Or a term describing the physical layout accurately.

Not an obscure rarely used term that could easily be mistaken for a gender identity.
I understand that with English not being your native tongue, you're apt to rely far more on the denotation of words, perhaps without fully considering colloquial usage. I am asking you to consider the common usage of terms, and govern yourself accordingly.
I don't believe that that is that big of an ask.

Easiest example:
TransAtlantic - Often used / CisAtlantic - NEVER used. Never ever ever have I heard this term. And I've lived on both sides of the Atlantic.
The use of the term here is archaic, and not in common use. The words themselves have fallen (outside of the chemistry community) into far more common use as gender identifiers.
Keeping up with language isn't always easy, but it is part of life.

This thread is also not the best place for this discussion, perhaps we should move back to the thread that TrenchCoatGuy linked for further discussion.



Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 602
Submissions: 15

Reply with quote
Posted on Fri May 11, 2018 6:24 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Daemon_Lotos wrote:
Chainmailbasket_com wrote:
Will these items require renaming then?

http://www.mailleartisans.org/weaves/weavedisplay.php?key=1043
http://www.mailleartisans.org/weaves/weavedisplay.php?key=1042


Those two come CLOSEST to the technical use of Cis as it appears in chemistry use... But in an ideal world, yes... A rename would be good.

Karpeth wrote:
As you are the one hindering the use of classical scientific words with no real ”bad” connotations, I believe the responsibility to find a different Word is yours.

Furthermore, creating a new term, would only decrease legibility.

Please, I implore you, what would you accept as a substitute?


Basically either a term specifically created for chainmail / Or a term describing the physical layout accurately.

Not an obscure rarely used term that could easily be mistaken for a gender identity.
I understand that with English not being your native tongue, you're apt to rely far more on the denotation of words, perhaps without fully considering colloquial usage. I am asking you to consider the common usage of terms, and govern yourself accordingly.
I don't believe that that is that big of an ask.

Easiest example:
TransAtlantic - Often used / CisAtlantic - NEVER used. Never ever ever have I heard this term. And I've lived on both sides of the Atlantic.

This thread is also not the best place for this discussion, perhaps we should move back to the thread that TrenchCoatGuy linked for further discussion.


I fully agree This is not the topic for such discussion. I Will reply in the other topic on that matter.

Regarding the weaves; I have now fully perused the library.

I have excluded a lot of weaves from This list in the category TCG brought up, with just a few ”first examples” noted. Therefore things which offer little difference (4-1/8-2) is not brought up, Unless the weave info contradicts the image.

There are 6 weave pairs that I don’t have enough information on, that I hope someone could come with insight on; as Well as 15 examples of weaves extremely close to eachother. (So much so that RSD and Barrel are used interchangably ”in the wild”).

While I understand that the 3 ”proven” need no discussion, as shown by the retraction of CMBs retraction of his submission, I hope I could get some input on the rest? Wink


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer. Fluent in c++.

Joined: May 26, 2010
Posts: 236
Submissions: 30

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon May 14, 2018 4:28 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

Karpeth wrote:
I havn't looked closely, but Feather Pen states it's the same as Quill, and vice versa.


They are to each other as Roundmaille is to Inverted Round. I haven't read the thread but I can't imagine those have come under fire.

EDIT:
Daemon_Lotos wrote:
In the interest of some people taking issue with the use of gender orientation terms to refer to MAIL weaves, I’ve removed the usage.
If you’re curious, please message me and I can elaborate.

I want my disagreement with this position on record.

Joined: August 30, 2008
Posts: 3064
Submissions: 20
Location: Burlington, ON, Canada

Reply with quote
Posted on Mon May 14, 2018 5:58 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Slagr wrote:
Daemon_Lotos wrote:
In the interest of some people taking issue with the use of gender orientation terms to refer to MAIL weaves, I’ve removed the usage.
If you’re curious, please message me and I can elaborate.

I want my disagreement with this position on record.


Noted.
I encourage you to join the discussion: http://www.mailleartisans.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=19169



Joined: August 30, 2010
Posts: 602
Submissions: 15

Reply with quote
Posted on Tue Jun 26, 2018 7:56 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

I’ll add another one here...

Japanese 8 in 1 / 4 in 1 is trivially the same as Hodo, as Well as the similarily named weave.


Total Nerd: MScDS, Mailler, Gamer. Fluent in c++.

Joined: October 22, 2010
Posts: 691
Submissions: 390
Location: Yucaipa, CA

Reply with quote
Posted on Tue Sep 04, 2018 8:59 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

i'm concerned that Dukkha 4 in 1 Chain and Persian Box are the same weave. can anyone confirm?



Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Page 2 of 5. Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Sun Sep 22, 2019 8:40 am
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Weaves Discussion
Display posts from previous: