This leads to another question, though. In your step 10 of the traditional method, your comment says (=on 1d-2d). What is "1d-2d"?
I do understand that a straightforward mizz version of a figure requires close analysis and reformulation, and the traditional construction methods often require complex mizz code to represent. That's kind of why I'm wanting to do them the traditional way, though: to really make sure I understand the edge cases in mizz code (like how the "q" can be used). I'm really focusing right now on reproducing CFJ's original steps as close as I can, in mizz code.
Thanks!
- Jamis
OK, mizz checks.1) Traditional0 base10 2.6,qu (=on 1d-2d)
1 1
2 1,(s)5b
3 1,2b
4 5
5 5,1bi
6 1
7 1,5a
8 1h,2a
9 (1h*)1l11 (auto off 2 old) or 2 old12 2,2.6 (keep 2 loop high position with 3)13 5
14 Caroline2) Easy mizz way0 base10 2e,(2b)qu (=on 1d-2d)
1 1
2 1,(s)5b
3 1,2b
4 5
5 5,1bi
6 1
7 1,5a
8 1h,2a
9 (1h*)1l11 2.3h,2b12 513 CarolineAlmost of traditional figure has specially traditional method,But Mizz code is not belong to hands move, just fly the string.independent from traditional hands move.Analysis is required to get figure.----- Original Message -----From: Jamis BuckSent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 10:05 PMSubject: [mizz-code] Osage Diamonds questionIn order to stretch my understanding of mizz code I've been working on
transcribing the figures in "String Figures and How to Make Them"
(http://www.stringfigures.info/cfj/) into mizz code. Surprisingly,
I've encountered a situation I'm not sure how to describe in mizz code
while transcribing Osage Diamonds. Here's what I've got:
0 base
1 1
2 1,(s)5b
3 1,2b
4 5
5 5,1bi
6 1
7 1,5a
8 1h,2a
9 (1h*)1l
10 ???
11 5
12 SPR & arrange
Note step 10. This is what is typically described as "insert
forefinger into triangles near thumbs, let forefinger loop slip off of
finger, and rotate finger away and up." In mizz code terms, I think it
would be something like this:
10 2bd,(2b)qu (auto-off 2)
However, it's not a loop around a palmar string so I don't think q is
the right term for it. It's like q, except it hooks around 1b/2a.
In thinking about this, I realized that q and d (diamond strings)
could be generalized as a predicate Q(x), which represents the set of
strings that loop around x. Then, we could define q, d1, d1d, etc.
like this:
q = Q(p)
d1 = Q(5b)u1 or Q(5b)d1 (assuming 5b is the far transverse string)
d1d = Q(1a)u1 or Q(1a)d1 (assuming 1a is the near transverse string)
etc.
Of course, we would want to keep "q", "d1", "d1d", etc. because they
are simpler to type. But having a generalization would let us say
things like:
10 2bd,(2b)Q(1b)u
without having to introduce another special character for every
possible kind of loop.
It gets a little awkward when you're using it in an under path,
because of the parentheses (example from my transcription of "Seven
Stars" from CFJ):
3.6,(2b Q(1b)d)Q(1b)u
I think it works okay, though. What do you think, mizz?
- Jamis
Offline 
Send Email