Question about "alpha" tag
View previous topic | View next topic >
Post new topic Reply to topic
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Weaves Discussion
   
Author Message

Joined: May 27, 2019
Posts: 4
Submissions: 0
Location: Denver, CO

Question about "alpha" tag
Reply with quote
Posted on Tue May 28, 2019 6:21 am
Link to Post: Link to Post

In browsing the Weaves, I've often felt a little lost. I'd love to be able to filter down to the foundational weaves--the ones upon which the majority of other weaves are based.

From the definition, on the Tag Definitions article--"the primary structure for a weave family or branch of that family" it seems like the "alpha" tag is meant to accomplish that.

However, when I filter down to say--European and Alpha, I would expect to see just a handful--perhaps 2-in-1, Helm, Byzantine/Box, and E4-1, give or take. Instead there are around 30.

So perhaps I misunderstood the way that tag is meant to be used. Perhaps it means less "the foundation of a a family or branch" and more "a weave upon which there are one or more variants or modifications". (Yes, I realize that the difference between a "branch" and "one or more variants or modifications" is subjective.)

Even with that definition, it seems like weaves come up that would not qualify. Take Iguanascale--there are no other weaves noted on the page as variants, no tutorials, only one gallery image, and a search for it in the weaves library does not pull up any other weaves. (Nothing against the weave--just using it as an example.)

Of course I get that this content is contributed by volunteers and this may just represent a gap in what people have gotten around to. It just seems like there would naturally be a fair amount of activity around any weave labeled "alpha".

Perhaps in some cases it is intended to mean "weaves not based upon any other weave"? Or am I misunderstanding? I'm still at a relative beginner level, so I don't claim to have an in-depth understanding of the weave family tree. (Kinda what I'm working on!)

Joined: August 30, 2008
Posts: 3058
Submissions: 20
Location: Burlington, ON, Canada

Re: Question about "alpha" tag
Reply with quote
Posted on Tue May 28, 2019 1:47 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

alissathorne wrote:
In browsing the Weaves, I've often felt a little lost. I'd love to be able to filter down to the foundational weaves--the ones upon which the majority of other weaves are based.

From the definition, on the Tag Definitions article--"the primary structure for a weave family or branch of that family" it seems like the "alpha" tag is meant to accomplish that.

However, when I filter down to say--European and Alpha, I would expect to see just a handful--perhaps 2-in-1, Helm, Byzantine/Box, and E4-1, give or take. Instead there are around 30.

So perhaps I misunderstood the way that tag is meant to be used. Perhaps it means less "the foundation of a a family or branch" and more "a weave upon which there are one or more variants or modifications". (Yes, I realize that the difference between a "branch" and "one or more variants or modifications" is subjective.)

Even with that definition, it seems like weaves come up that would not qualify. Take Iguanascale--there are no other weaves noted on the page as variants, no tutorials, only one gallery image, and a search for it in the weaves library does not pull up any other weaves. (Nothing against the weave--just using it as an example.)

Of course I get that this content is contributed by volunteers and this may just represent a gap in what people have gotten around to. It just seems like there would naturally be a fair amount of activity around any weave labeled "alpha".

Perhaps in some cases it is intended to mean "weaves not based upon any other weave"? Or am I misunderstanding? I'm still at a relative beginner level, so I don't claim to have an in-depth understanding of the weave family tree. (Kinda what I'm working on!)


Tagging this to come back to.

The Weave DB is a bit of an organizational nightmare. Dave and I have spoken about it briefly, but it warrants a deeper look.

The way you view the Alpha tag is how it should work, yes.



Joined: March 29, 2005
Posts: 498
Submissions: 26
Location: Plumstead, London

Reply with quote
Posted on Tue May 28, 2019 1:54 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

I agree, there are many ways that weaves should be searchable (depending on your angle of inquiry) In their defence I would add that all the people involved here are doing this for the love of the art. If they happen to be taking on the great responsibility of keeping things up to date and all new things properly vetted; then they're not making maille....

Which is (to my mind) a bit of an unfortunate turn of events. So this is more of a question to both you and the moderators: If this seems like a worth while thing, can we as users help in any way? Smile

To paraphrase a famous quote, "Ask what Maille artisans can do for you, yet accept that we as makers should be ready to ask ourselves, what we can do to help in kind."

P.S. I saw your post on
http://www.mailleartisans.org/board/viewtopic.php?t=20102&highlight=

Cool beanies! I will review!

Joined: March 26, 2002
Posts: 1877
Submissions: 552
Location: Chainmailland, Chainmailia

Reply with quote
Posted on Tue May 28, 2019 5:21 pm
Link to Post: Link to Post

Iguanascale being tagged as an alpha weave has got to be an accidental mistake. I’m removing that. If it wasn’t a mistake then I await an explanation as to why.


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

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT. The time now is Mon Jul 22, 2019 11:22 pm
M.A.I.L. Forum Index -> Weaves Discussion
Display posts from previous: