Poll: Which layout do you prefer? This poll is closed. 

Layout a)  31  64.58%  
Layout b)  17  35.42%  
Total  48 votes  100% 
* You voted for this item.  [Show Results] 
A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout

04192014, 09:53 PM
(This post was last modified: 04192014 09:54 PM by Massimo Gnerucci.)
Post: #61




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
Walter, now you're going to hate me... ;)
I found that ISO 800002 states: Quote:Clause 3 specifies that variables such as x and y, and functions in general (e.g., f(x)) are printed in italic type, while mathematical constants are in Roman (upright) type. Examples given of mathematical (upright) constants are e, π and i. The numbers 1, 2, 3, etc. are also upright. Time to shuffle some pixels, again? :D Greetings, Massimo +×÷ ↔ left is right and right is wrong 

04192014, 11:32 PM
Post: #62




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
(04192014 09:19 PM)walter b Wrote: There are some who want to see more lower case letters on the keys. So the new alternatives are I'm not opposed, in principle, but I find the lower case 'a' a bit hard to distinguish in this font. I think the capital versions are easier to read (in this font). Jonathan 

04202014, 01:22 AM
Post: #63




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
(04192014 09:53 PM)Massimo Gnerucci Wrote: Walter, now you're going to hate me... You should quote the next paragraph as well, not just what's written in Wikipedia: Quote:3 Variables, functions and operators The ISO 800002 is behind paywall (CHF 158.), which is a very nice way to spread a standard. 

04202014, 01:48 AM
Post: #64




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
(04192014 05:27 PM)walter b Wrote: So we'd need ln, lg, sin, cos, tan, asin, acos, atan, hyp, deg, and rad.We rather need: \(\ln x, \lg x, \sin x, \cos x, \tan x, \arcsin x, \arccos x, \arctan x\) Or if you prefer: \(\sin^{1} x, \cos^{1} x, \tan^{1} x\) How are you going to explain that inconsistency to your grandchildren? Using \(\sqrt{x}, x^2, y^x\, 10^x, x!\) but then suddenly forgetting the parameter \(x\) in all the other functions? 

04202014, 06:59 AM
Post: #65




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
(04202014 01:22 AM)Thomas Klemm Wrote: You should quote the next paragraph as well, not just what's written in Wikipedia: For the interested reader: 800002 (04202014 01:22 AM)Thomas Klemm Wrote: The ISO 800002 is behind paywall (CHF 158.), which is a very nice way to spread a standard. I agree. Greetings, Massimo +×÷ ↔ left is right and right is wrong 

04202014, 12:51 PM
(This post was last modified: 04202014 12:52 PM by Sanjeev Visvanatha.)
Post: #66




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
Option a), please. Our standard should reflect prior well thought out traditions in our community, IMO.  Sanjeev Visvanatha 

04202014, 02:06 PM
Post: #67




I'll wait for another 24h and then that will be it
FYI, if no one of those who wanted lower case letters will speak up, it's going to be option (a) by tomorrow 15:00 UTC. Else, discussion may last a bit longer until a majority vote is found. After all, we know what works for the WP 34S since 2011.
d:) 

04202014, 02:10 PM
Post: #68




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
(04202014 02:06 PM)walter b Wrote: FYI, if no one of those who wanted lower case letters will speak up, it's going to be option (a) by tomorrow 15:00 UTC. Else, discussion may last a bit longer until a majority vote is found. After all, we know what works for the WP 34S since 2011. I really don't care for UPPER/lower case... just don't explain anymore your adversion for LOG vs LG advocating international standards. Greetings, Massimo +×÷ ↔ left is right and right is wrong 

04202014, 02:28 PM
Post: #69




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout  
04202014, 03:17 PM
(This post was last modified: 04212014 04:26 AM by Dave Hicks.)
Post: #70




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
This poll reminds me of something that a moderator removed.


04202014, 04:03 PM
(This post was last modified: 04202014 04:07 PM by walter b.)
Post: #71




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
Thomas,
I'm sure you're feeling bad meanwhile about your thoughtless post. Else please give proper reason why you think (!) it being appropriate. (As you know I can stand quite a good lot of humour but that's beyond my limit. I will delete this post here as soon as you delete the preceding one). d:( 

04202014, 05:24 PM
Post: #72




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
I think that the use of upper case for calculator key labels comes from slide rule scale labels, which were almost always upper case. Few slide rules had the names of the functions. Those that did, usually had them correctly cased in addition to the traditional upper case scale labels, eg. "sin(x) S", TanCoT (x) T.
Depending on when and where and disciple you learned logarithms, the standard and computer program and language you usually use, and the publication's standards and editor's preferences, you will "naturally" have different meanings in your mind for log, ln, lg, lb. lb  seems to be used only for log 2 lg  means log (base indeterminate unless specified), or log 10, or log e ln  means log (base indeterminate unless specified), or log e, or log 10 log  means log (base indeterminate unless specified), or log 10, or log e It would have been convenient if hundreds of years ago it had been settled to always write lgbase(argument) but it wasn't and so we live with the mess. Lne and Lg10 might be the least confusion propagating (although to my taste they should be ln and log.) LOGx (y) or other variations ... please don't do that, as tempting as it is as the shift of x^y. 

04202014, 07:56 PM
Post: #73




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
(04202014 05:24 PM)htom trites Wrote: Depending on when and where and disciple you learned logarithms, the standard and computer program and language you usually use, and the publication's standards and editor's preferences, you will "naturally" have different meanings in your mind for log, ln, lg, lb.I concur. Quote:lg  means log (base indeterminate unless specified), or log 10, or log eNever seen that being used for log_{e} nor for an indeterminate log. Quote:ln  means log (base indeterminate unless specified), or log e, or log 10Only used for log_{e} according to my experience. Quote:log  means log (base indeterminate unless specified), or log 10, or log eNever seen that being used for log_{e}. Quote:Lne and Lg10 might be the least confusion propagating ...I guess I see what you wanted to tell and agree on ln and lg. Quote:LOGx (y) or other variations ... please don't do that, as tempting as it is as the shift of x^y. We already did  on the WP 34S. Please see gshifted 9 (LOG_{x} ) reverting y^x. d:) 

04202014, 08:23 PM
Post: #74




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
I've seen "lg" for "log" here and there, and thought it a typo. Recently I've been told by some students that "lg" is the abbreviation of "log"  and they don't recognize "log" as being the abbreviation of logarithm. Some think "sin" is an abbreviation of "sinusoidal" and that "sine" is not a word at all. Schools these days ...
I should have included "lge", too, as a sometimes synonym of ln e . Prescriptive vocabulary vs descriptive vocabulary may be good in some things but I think prescriptive works better in math. LOGx, eh? I think you just sold me on a 34s! 

04202014, 09:43 PM
Post: #75




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
(04202014 07:56 PM)walter b Wrote:(04202014 05:24 PM)htom trites Wrote: log  means log (base indeterminate unless specified), or log 10, or log eNever seen that being used for log_{e}. Definition of Logarithm from MathWorld: Quote:Note that while logarithm base 10 is denoted \(\log x\) in this work, on calculators, and in elementary algebra and calculus textbooks, mathematicians and advanced mathematics texts uniformly use the notation \(\log x\) to mean \(\ln x\), and therefore use \(\log_{10} x\) to mean the common logarithm. Extreme care is therefore needed when consulting the literature. Cheers Thomas 

04212014, 12:05 AM
Post: #76




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
(04202014 03:17 PM)Thomas Klemm Wrote: This poll reminds me of the Anschluss: I had hoped this post would go away before now. I reported it as abuse and just wanted to publicly say that I think it is offensive. I hope the site admin removes it soon. Thanks to Walter for all the work he has done on the WP34s and the WP31s. Jonathan 

04212014, 06:17 AM
Post: #77




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout  
04212014, 07:19 AM
Post: #78




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
(04212014 06:17 AM)Thomas Klemm Wrote: You started a poll with two variants: The poll was about overall Layouts, not about a single letter. Who's literate, read! 

04212014, 07:47 AM
Post: #79




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
(04212014 06:17 AM)Thomas Klemm Wrote: Now tell me how is there still a choice? I hope this could represent your feelings in a lighter mood... :) Greetings, Massimo +×÷ ↔ left is right and right is wrong 

04212014, 01:22 PM
(This post was last modified: 04212014 01:35 PM by Manolo Sobrino.)
Post: #80




RE: A sweet little poll about the WP 31S layout
It is Walter's calculator, he wants LG so he gets LG, period. The nice thing about this calc is that it is GPLv3, so anybody can change whatever they want. There's no point in arguing about it. Some banter is fun, but I wouldn't take it too far.
The whole matter is funny. The designer/creator goes for a standard that no one is really using, because that is the very German right thing to do. And then people complain endlessly as if this were a design committee. Well, it is not. You had the choice to vote for a layout with LOG, just 1/3 of voters did. Walter gave you the chance. I'm genuinely surprised he proposed having this poll: layout b) was just an exercise after all (see the other thread). Either he was really interested in the layout, or it was the easy way of legitimising his choices although he didn't have to! There's nothing bad with it. I'm more surprised that no one is really thinking about the general idea behind these layouts. There haven't been any just scientific, non programmable HP calcs since the 31E, 32E. And those were 30key calculators. This one has 37. The other comparable scientific is the 45, but then it has 3 rows of 5 keys and 5 rows of 4 keys. The 20b/30b has 2 rows of 6 keys and 5 rows of 5 keys (and you can't change the ON position)... great, so now we can make it look like a 42S... Why? You guys haven't been using a just scientific with these settings. This is a new problem for a different use case and you can't see it (for instance, the prominent position of STO/RCL is arbitrary). IMO discussing these options would have been much more interesting than arguing about the O in LOG. It should be LOG10, BTW. I'm done with this layout, if Walter wants it that way, so be it. I can assign keys, I can print a different one... I can even change other internal choices in mine(*). What's the problem? (*) I've been thinking about more interesting things that %CH. I'd like to test a key that would give you the product of all the non zero numbers in the stack, or a key that would give you the sum of the squared numbers in the stack, the first one would change the way I use RPN, the second would be a handy macro. 

« Next Oldest  Next Newest »

User(s) browsing this thread: