Pilling diagrams (was: How Old is "Old" in SCD- detour off subject)

Anselm Lingnau

Dec. 4, 2006, 12:24 p.m. (Message 47261)

Peter Price wrote:

> A map is an abstraction of the real world - you gain infomation but in
> exchange you loose some as well. A good example can be found if you are a
> member of Google. They offer a map service - you can look at a pure map, a
> satelite photo or a hybrid (map overlay on top of photo). Each gives you a
> different kind and degree of information.

You don't have to be a member of Google -- just look at 
http://www.strathspey.org/maps/scdmap.html :^)

> This works for me. It may not work for you. I certainly think that
> Pilling's idea is at least the equal of sliced bread. And I know people who
> are completely disoriented by Pilling diagrams - they simply don't think
> that way.

That's exactly my point. If you will you can (cruelly, but effectively) divide 
people like so:

  1. People who can't handle Scottish country dancing.
  2. People who can handle Scottish country dancing.
     2.1. People who can't also handle Pilling diagrams.
     2.2. People who can also handle Pilling diagrams.

To be able to use Pilling diagrams, you not only must be able (as any Scottish 
country dancer ought to) to translate »rights and lefts« into a certain 
series of movements on the dance floor, but you must also be able to figure 
out that »RL« stands for »rights and lefts«. This is a fairly obvious 
connection to make, unlike some of the other symbols (many people I know get 
thrown by the symbols for »ladies' chain« and »men's chain«; I *think* that 
the »pons asinorum« in this case is that the ladies' chain's interlocked 
squares derive from the »square« symbol for ladies in general, and the other 
way round for men, but who is to say?). If I may be excused a simile from 
computer programming, if the movements on the floor are »machine language«, 
the standard dance terminology, stuff like »rights and lefts«, is something 
like the »C« language -- still fairly low-level but without all the 
complicated details of getting from A to B [sic]. Pilling sits (mostly) on 
top of standard dance terminology and could be considered a »very high level 
language«. Layers of abstraction! (Non-programmers may now wake up again.)

Relying exclusively on Pilling-style diagrams would be as wrong as relying 
exclusively on oral transmission of dances, or exclusively on long-form dance 
descriptions, or exclusively on »minicribs«. They all have their advantages 
and disadvantages, many of which have been aired on this list in the past.

Personally I vastly prefer Pilling-style diagrams (with all their 
shortcomings) to »minicribs« as dance reminders. Other people feel 
differently. How does it matter when we can still do the same dance in the 
same set together?

Anselm
-- 
Anselm Lingnau, Frankfurt, Germany ..................... xxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx
You write a great program, regardless of language, by redoing it over & over &
over & over, until your fingers bleed and your soul is drained. But if you
tell newbies that, they might decide to go off and do something sensible, like
bomb defusing.                                                   -- Tim Peters