Talk:One-cell-thick pattern: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Proposal |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
==Proposal== | ==Proposal== | ||
I propose to rename this article to "one cell thick pattern". I think that the term "unidimensional" may lead to ambiguitity (i.e. confusion with binary, nearest-neighbor, one-dimensional automaton, also called "elementary cellular automata"). Another reason is that two dimensional patterns comprise not only two cell thick patterns but three, four, etc. cell thick. -- [[User:InfiniteGrowth|InfiniteGrowth]] 07:50, 5 June 2009 (UTC) | I propose to rename this article to "one cell thick pattern". I think that the term "unidimensional" may lead to ambiguitity (i.e. confusion with binary, nearest-neighbor, one-dimensional automaton, also called "elementary cellular automata"). Another reason is that two dimensional patterns comprise not only two cell thick patterns but three, four, etc. cell thick. -- [[User:InfiniteGrowth|InfiniteGrowth]] 07:50, 5 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
: I'm fine with that. Any other thoughts/comments from other wiki users? [[User:Nathaniel|Nathaniel]] 12:18, 5 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 12:18, 5 June 2009
Software
Were any of the programs used to find the unidimensional patterns ever made publicly available? Lewis Patterson 11:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Proposal
I propose to rename this article to "one cell thick pattern". I think that the term "unidimensional" may lead to ambiguitity (i.e. confusion with binary, nearest-neighbor, one-dimensional automaton, also called "elementary cellular automata"). Another reason is that two dimensional patterns comprise not only two cell thick patterns but three, four, etc. cell thick. -- InfiniteGrowth 07:50, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
- I'm fine with that. Any other thoughts/comments from other wiki users? Nathaniel 12:18, 5 June 2009 (UTC)