New forum - CRF polytopes

[Keiji]

I've been wondering for a while now as to whether the CRF polytope discovery project should have its own forum in Geometry - today the sole topic about it has reached its 50th page. If I created such a forum, I'd be spending quite some time splitting up the existing topic. I think this would be beneficial, as it means one can look back on older posts much more easily, and new discoveries related to old posts could be posted in the appropriate topic.

Any thoughts?

[anderscolingustafson]

Well the topic is so large that it takes up nearly half the posts of the Polytopes forum and has more posts than all the topics in the Toratopes forum combined. It has so many posts that I find it overwhelming to read through it for the simple reason that there is so much to read which is why I haven't contributed to it. I think it has enough posts that it should have it's own forum and divided up into multiple sub topics to make it easier to read through.

[quickfur]

Sounds like a good idea! There have been many threads and subthreads within the topic itself, going off in different directions, then converging, that even I myself have lost track of where I was going with a certain idea at times. Splitting them up into multiple topics would allow us to centralize the discussion of a specific idea / CRF in a form that's easy to go back and consult later. Several times I had to skim through a huge number of pages just to find a single post that I wanted to look up.

It's a pity that phpBB doesn't support full threading, where we would have been able to navigate the full discussion tree (and attach replies to the appropriate subtree, rather than just adding to the end of a linear list of posts). But splitting up into separate topics should suffice for our purposes.

The question then becomes, what topics we should split it into? Or I guess you could just figure that out as you go along, since you'll be essentially revisiting the unfolding of events as the CRF discovery project developed.

[Klitzing]

It's huge, agreed.
But I usually dwell at the surface. Only in quiet times I go backwards through. (In fact I've done that already.) So to me it's no harm being that large.

What I would like to point out, is whether there will be Impacts onto referenciations, when you split this thread?
I usually refer to specific Posts usually by means of crosslinks like http://hddb.teamikaria.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=1468&start=1470#p21267, not only from within hddb (those might be automatically changed accordingly, perhaps), but also from outside. - Would those referenciations (i.e. numberings) be kept, i.e. those URLs be working after that change still, or would those will brake down then? Providing either 404 or wrong results?

How could we keep up track on (e.g. externally) assigned links, providing thereafter still the correct results?

--- rk

[wendy]

I normally read the topic to see if someone is asking me a question or something. The CRF stuff is a tad beyond hand calculations. I don't know. Does the structure of CRFs lend themselves to multiple threads? I see you have various catogeries in the wiki for these sort of things, though.

It's not like Jonathan Bower's uniform project, where you start up 'regiment threads'. and list all the bodies under each thread. Some of the assorted mutations seem to be coming one on top of another. Even the ursulates have been mangled beyond recognition.

[Keiji]

I usually refer to specific Posts usually by means of crosslinks like http://hddb.teamikaria.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=1468&start=1470#p21267

That particular link will, unfortunately, break if the topic is split.

If you want a permanent link to a post, click the little icon to the left of the poster's name, then copy the URL. That will give you a URL with a "p=" parameter in it, from which the forum software identifies that specific post regardless of whether the topic gets split. This is how I generate links for references on the wiki.

To convert your link above is fairly simple, just work off the number after the "#p":

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=1468&start=1470#p21267 ->
viewtopic.php?p=21267#p21267

[Klitzing]

Great, exactly what I searched for: perma links.
--- rk

[quickfur]

@Keiji: maybe you could edit such links to be permanent links as you split up the topic? Since the conversion is trivial.

[Keiji]

Certainly, I can trawl through the database looking for "non-permanent" links - but Klitzing said he used those links elsewhere, so he'll need to update his links too.

[quickfur]

Certainly, I can trawl through the database looking for "non-permanent" links - but Klitzing said he used those links elsewhere, so he'll need to update his links too.

Oh, good point. There are links from the wiki too, and those would break as well. As well as potentially links from other external websites.

[Klitzing]

... but Klitzing said he used those links elsewhere, so he'll need to update his links too.

Already done. (According to your perma links.) - At least in my local copy (to be uploaded soon).
--- rk

[Keiji]

Alright, the Johnsonian Polytopes thread is currently locked while I spend some time splitting and organising the 1500+ posts in it.

If you want to discuss whatever happens to be at the end of that topic while you are reading it, feel free to start a new topic to reply, and I will merge it into the correct topic if necessary.

[Klitzing]

@keiji:
shouldn't the thread CRF pyramids in n dimensions now also be moved to CRF polytopes?
(And perhaps some other ones too?)
--- rk

[Keiji]

Indeed, and moved. I already moved all the ones I could see from page 1.

[wendy]

I'm thinking of moving all of the "notation-discussion" stuff to a separate thread, so people can comment on the general notation etc. I will see if i can figure out what Keiji did to do this.

[quickfur]

I think this post, this post, and this post should be moved to the D4.10 and D4.11 thread; right now they're in the J92 rhombochoron thread.

[quickfur]

Also, this post, this post, this post, this post, this post, this post, this post, and this post belong in their own thread; they are the last few posts of a discussion about Marek's idea of CRFs with duoprismic symmetry. I believe the earlier posts on this topic are still in the locked Johnsonian polytopes thread.

[Keiji]

Done and done. And a bunch more useless full-last-post-quotes removed.

[quickfur]

So, when will the rest of the posts in the original Johnsonian thread be split up? It's been a while. And it seems things in this new forum have slowed down quite a bit.

[Keiji]

Sorry; it's quite a job splitting all those posts!

I think all the main topics of discussion for now have been split out already so the main purpose has been achieved.

At some point, I'll go through and split the older ones but is there any rush?

[quickfur]

Sorry; it's quite a job splitting all those posts!

I think all the main topics of discussion for now have been split out already so the main purpose has been achieved.

At some point, I'll go through and split the older ones but is there any rush?

OK, OK, no rush. Just wondering what happened since the old thread hasn't changed for a couple o' weeks now.

[wendy]

Here is an interesting off-cut for a 'terminology' thread. This is just discussing notation and process, rather than any particular class of polytope. There is already a thread "new lace term" that this could be moved too. The idea is that bugs and whinges and suggestions about notation could be discussed somewhere that isn't one of the D threads.

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=1468&start=690#p18748 to viewtopic.php?f=32&t=1468&start=690#p18764 inclusive, plus

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=1468&start=690#p18814 to viewtopic.php?f=32&t=1468&start=720#p18832

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=1468&start=720#p18881 to viewtopic.php?f=32&t=1468&start=720#p18899

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=1468&start=750#p18903