Ever since official notation entered the regulations last year, some of us have been unhappy with the choices made. -------------------------- At the very least, I would like to see R'2 changed to R2', and correspondingly everywhere. Everyone I've talked with about this agrees with this, and there are several various reasons: [list=] [*]The 2 is the important part (on cubes), and the ' the appended directional note, redundant for many (e.g. all official) purposes. [*]R'2 separates the tall letters unnecessarily; R2' is visually less less confusing. [*]It causes issues with some Java applets, particularly Randelshofer's: ' is a suffix, 2 is considered part of the move, and getting around this requires some redundant coding. [/list] -------------------------- I would like to see the addition of an official definition of STM: Slice Turn Metric (STM) is defined as: * 12a20) Each move of the categories Face Moves, Double Outer Slice Moves, Inner Slice Moves, and Middle Slice Moves is counted as 1 move. * 12a21) Each rotation is counted as 0 moves. This allows for a simple official reference. It also allows us to discuss things like +2 for one slice turn off. (However, in order to keep all competitions comparable, we should stay with HTM for FMC) -------------------------- Scrambling: Many of us don't like the current notation for scrambling, especially "w" instead of lowercase and the new subscripts for 6x6x6 and 7x7x7. As a simple resolution that doesn't involve multiple contradictory official notations, I would like to propose that the notation of scrambles may be modified (either in the scrambler, or post-parsing), so long as the scrambles remain functionally equivalent. We can require this to be approved by the WCA delegate or board. -------------------------- It is much less confusing to use lowercase and uppercase letters consistently, where "r" is a double-outer-layer turn on all cubes, for example (the idea of SiGN). However, I understand the need for Rw, particularly in FMC (U/u vs. U/Uw). [r] doesn't correspond to any well-used convention, but it's better than using parentheses, which are common for grouping moves.

[quote="Lucas":onwcomfx] At the very least, I would like to see R'2 changed to R2', and correspondingly everywhere. -------------------------- Scrambling: Many of us don't like the current notation for scrambling, especially "w" instead of lowercase and the new subscripts for 6x6x6 and 7x7x7. -------------------------- It is much less confusing to use lowercase and uppercase letters consistently, where "r" is a double-outer-layer turn on all cubes, for example (the idea of SiGN). However, I understand the need for Rw, particularly in FMC (U/u vs. U/Uw). [r] doesn't correspond to any well-used convention, but it's better than using parentheses, which are common for grouping moves.[/quote:onwcomfx] I would agree with all of these for more or less identical reasons. [quote="Lucas":onwcomfx] I would like to see the addition of an official definition of STM: Slice Turn Metric (STM) is defined as: * 12a20) Each move of the categories Face Moves, Double Outer Slice Moves, Inner Slice Moves, and Middle Slice Moves is counted as 1 move. * 12a21) Each rotation is counted as 0 moves. [/quote:onwcomfx] I don't agree with using STM for simplicity's sake. The current definition of +2's, etc, fits well with HTM, and STM would only introduce unwanted complications. It would complicate what you could define as +2's, what may be considered valid scrambles, and especially notation. For example, would doing r l' be counted as 1 or 2 moves on a 4x4? How would you note moving the 3 inner slices on a 7x7? HTM just seems more natural to use. ...and [url=http://www.worldcubeassociation.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=455&p=3357#p3357:onwcomfx]Gilles has elaborated some[/url:onwcomfx].

I already elaborated on 6x6 and 7x7 notation in [url=http://www.worldcubeassociation.org/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=1070:1l80etny]this[/url:1l80etny] post. I changed the scrambling html file and everything. As for the "wide" notation, I don't particularly like it. I don't use it in any practice, and am forced to use it while scrambling for a competition. I don't find it THAT bad when I do use it, but it's an unfamiliar and, personally, a bad system. If we adapted prefix notation, then we can denote slice turns for all levels. 2R would be multislice 2r would be single slice I'm not worried about it that much to halt the acceptance of the 2009 regulations, because if you have the knowledge, you can edit the official scrambler to use whatever notation you would like it to use. As long as the program is the same, I don't think the actual notation you are personally using matters.

I quickly got used to the "wide" notation (that's the one with suffix "w", right?) and also the "prefix" notation, but the current planned official notation confuses my mind, probably because "R2" and "R[sub]2[/sub]| look so similar yet mean so different things. Takes more mental effort to not confuse them. I also noticed that a monospaced font helps me tremendously compared to a proportional one.

I agree. I was scrambling the 6^3 in The Hague, and having to distinguish between these two kind of moves was really a pain. Scrambling such big cubes accurately is didficult enough for the average scrambler, it would be a good idea not to make things worse with a confusing notation.

[quote="StefanPochmann":sqe52kd1]I quickly got used to the "wide" notation (that's the one with suffix "w", right?) and also the "prefix" notation, but the current planned official notation confuses my mind, probably because "R2" and "R[sub]2[/sub]| look so similar yet mean so different things. Takes more mental effort to not confuse them.[/quote:sqe52kd1] Likewise. [quote="StefanPochmann":sqe52kd1]I also noticed that a monospaced font helps me tremendously compared to a proportional one.[/quote:sqe52kd1] That is what I liked about the scrambler on your page.

I changed '2 to 2' for version draft 2. I do not agree on the proposal for the slice moves. It is not a notation change, but a different game. Will reply about the notation for 6x6 and 7x7 in the other topic.