What about 'canvas'?
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 12. August 2018 um 20:01 Uhr
> Von: Max <abonneme...@revolwear.com>
> An: "Miller Puckette" <m...@ucsd.edu>
> Cc: pd-list@lists.iem.at
> Betreff: Re: [PD] distinction Pd lingo: abstraction, subpatch, subwindow
>
> I see, then maybe we are better off without umbrella term and just refer
> to subpatches and abstractions as "subpatches and abstractions".
>
> m.
>
> On 12.08.2018 19:58, Miller Puckette wrote:
> > Trouble might be that there are other forms of subwindows (array, text) that
> > aren't patches. So we'd need a term for 'a subwindow that's a patch'.
> > Maybe
> > 'patch subwindow'? But that's so close to 'subpatch' that it would make
> > everythig worse I think.
> >
> > cheers
> > M
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 07:00:36PM +0200, Max wrote:
> >> May I propose subwindow as an umbrella term for both abstractions and
> >> subpatches?
> >>
> >> Both terms should be either hyphenated or not. I am fine with not
> >> hyphenating them, but as a native German speaker I might have a bias
> >> towards
> >> sticking words together.
> >>
> >> m.
> >>
> >> On 12.08.2018 18:45, Miller Puckette wrote:
> >>> Well, (adopting for the moment subpatch/abstraction for the larger class
> >>> and
> >>> one-off subpatch for the more specific one of a non-abstraction)...
> >>>
> >>> I imagine that more things are true of subpatch/abstractions (they have
> >>> subwindows, inlets, outlets; and their run-time semantics are identical)
> >>> than are true of either subset alone (of which we may say that saving and
> >>> loading, and $-argument handling act differently).
> >>>
> >>> So it's convenient to have some name or other for
> >>> 'abstraction/subpatch'...
> >>> but if just calling this a 'subpatch' is confusing, perhaps we can think
> >>> of
> >>> another term.
> >>>
> >>> cheers
> >>> Miller
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 02:23:15PM +0200, Max wrote:
> >>>> Hi Miller, thanks for chiming in.
> >>>>
> >>>> On 12.08.2018 00:54, Miller Puckette wrote:
> >>>>> I think the best terminology is "sub-patch" for either an abstraction or
> >>>>> for a one-off subpatch. (But then we probably need a better term for
> >>>>> 'one-off';
> >>>>> maybe 'ad hoc'?
> >>>>
> >>>> may I ask the rationale for it?
> >>>>
> >>>> I believe a clearly defined and consistent terminology is very important
> >>>> for
> >>>> people trying to understand the manuals and helpfiles.
> >>>> The definitions in 2.7 and 2.7.1 are good, and I think the terms
> >>>> "subpatch"
> >>>> and "abstraction" are good too.
> >>>> ** subpatch ** is like a folder structure where things can be put into
> >>>> and
> >>>> stuffed away.
> >>>> ** abstraction ** is exactly what it sounds like. The term doesn't try
> >>>> to be
> >>>> what a "class" is in other languages, I think that's smart.
> >>>>
> >>>> The established definitions give us a clear distinction between
> >>>> externals,
> >>>> abstractions and subpatches.
> >>>>
> >>>> Now I just wish the documentation would be consistent with those
> >>>> established
> >>>> terms and not adding confusion by using the terms differently.
> >>>>
> >>>> m.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> cheers
> >>>>> Miller
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 01:44:18PM +0200, Max wrote:
> >>>>>> In the Pd documentation the word
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> abstraction is found 1859 times
> >>>>>> subpatch is found 2142 times
> >>>>>> sub-patch is found 45 times
> >>>>>> subwindow is found 24 times
> >>>>>> sub-window is found 1 time (that's in the html document, where it
> >>>>>> occurs 3
> >>>>>> times hyphenated and 1 time not hyphenated)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> For reference: Definitions of the terms subpatch and abstraction can be
> >>>>>> found in paragraphs 2.7 and 2.7.1 of the documentation.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The terms however are consistently used inconsistent.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> in 2.7.2 "Graph-on-parent subpatches" the illustration shows an
> >>>>>> abstraction,
> >>>>>> not a subpatch. The text first talks about an abstraction and then
> >>>>>> continues: "When the sub-patch is closed, all controls in it appear on
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> object instead; so the number box in the sub-patch in the example
> >>>>>> above is
> >>>>>> the same one as you see in the box. "
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Even weirder, there is a definition of the term "abstraction" in the
> >>>>>> clone-help.pd which goes as follows: "a patch loaded as an object in
> >>>>>> another
> >>>>>> patch"
> >>>>>> but in the same patch the clones abstraction is named
> >>>>>> "clone-subpatch.pd".
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Is there something I am missing here?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> m.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 05.08.2018 12:01, Max wrote:
> >>>>>>> OK, let me try myself, please correct me:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> An abstraction is a Pd patch which is used like an object in another
> >>>>>>> Pd
> >>>>>>> patch.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> A subpatch is saved within the main patch and is constructed with [pd
> >>>>>>> {name}]. Multiple subpatches with the same name may coexist.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Subwindow is the umbrella term for both of the prior terms.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> If someone can confirm that the above definition is true, I will make
> >>>>>>> some pull requests to the documentation/ help files since it isn't
> >>>>>>> consistent. The pd~-help for example.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 04.08.2018 14:05, Max wrote:
> >>>>>>>> In the helpfiles and on this list the three words
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> 'abstraction'
> >>>>>>>> 'subpatch' or 'sub-patch'
> >>>>>>>> 'subwindow'
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> are used. could someone provide a definition of those? I suspect
> >>>>>>>> they aren't used in a consistent way throughout the documentation.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> m.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
