Editing Talk:Johnson solid (section)

== Organizing the table ==

Can anyone edit this article so that there's one large table of all 92 figures rather than several small tables?? This way, the table can be re-sorted by the number of faces each polyhedron has or any other appropriate way. [[User:Georgia guy|Georgia guy]] ([[User talk:Georgia guy|talk]]) 21:38, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

: I think the value of multiple tables is that it easier to edit, and there were distinct groupings by named categories from Johnson's numbering, but it looks easy to delete the sections and table headers to remerge into a single table if you want to try. [[User:Tomruen|Tom Ruen]] ([[User talk:Tomruen|talk]]) 21:48, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

: Adding a "|-" before the headers seemed to do the trick! [[User:Tomruen|Tom Ruen]] ([[User talk:Tomruen|talk]]) 22:19, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

:: This was not a good change. The classes made it easier to figure out how the solids were made and where the regular variations started and stopped, so that if you needed to do something for a set of the solids you could work out your process from choices in each class and extend it to the rest regularly. So there's a [[Pareto principle]] in the information one needs to study these solids and learn their types. One can easily merge all the tables in a sandbox if one needs them ordered by a column of the table. ᛭ [[User:LokiClock|LokiClock]] ([[User talk:LokiClock|talk]]) 23:22, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

: Perhaps both are useful, grouped solids here, and [[List of Johnson solids]] as a single sortable table? (I definitely use the sort feature, by face counts, edge counts, or symmetry) Perhaps the list here should be simpler, without element counts, symmetry, etc? [[User:Tomruen|Tom Ruen]] ([[User talk:Tomruen|talk]]) 00:08, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
: I added [[List of Johnson solids]] as an experiment, copied from here, so this article could have a more compact summary by groupings? [[User:Tomruen|Tom Ruen]] ([[User talk:Tomruen|talk]]) 00:15, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
: I started reworking the first ones into topological groups. I'm not sure if this helps [[User:LokiClock|LokiClock]]'s purpose.  [[User:Tomruen|Tom Ruen]] ([[User talk:Tomruen|talk]]) 02:40, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

:: Yes, that serves the original purposes I had used this article's classification for. If the solids are given in order in this table, then we don't need to group the solids in order here. Is there a reason for having the augmentation and diminishing subclasses as separate sections? Also, I found that if you use <nowiki><abbr title="heynow">2</abbr></nowiki>, <abbr title="heynow">2</abbr>, the tables will still sort the numbers inside the tag properly, so perhaps the beginnings of the sections in the original numeration can be labelled inside the table. ᛭ [[User:LokiClock|LokiClock]] ([[User talk:LokiClock|talk]]) 06:06, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

::: I'm not sure I follow. I hope the groupings here are helpful. Myself, I'm interested in showing similar non-Johnson solids as well, whether regular, semiregular, or having coplanar faces, so I started adding some of these. I added the bottom rows of the table on "augmented from polyhedra" to help show their construction, since some of the views, even transparent, are confusing to see easily. Anyway, I'd do more when I have some time. [[User:Tomruen|Tom Ruen]] ([[User talk:Tomruen|talk]]) 06:12, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
::: p.s. I'm unsure if the nets are helpful here, so those rows might be removed. [[User:Tomruen|Tom Ruen]] ([[User talk:Tomruen|talk]]) 06:14, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

:::: They are helpful. Looking again, they have different themes of construction, even if they're all the same type of modification, and some solids have more than one construction. I think the nets are helpful because they can give clues as to how the solids are similar to others and how to dissect them and put them together. It can be hard to figure out what the "others" and the rotunda are all-around using just the picture. Just now I used them to make sure the triangular hebesphenorotunda's squares all had 3 triangles attached, which suggested it had triangular symmetry (the triplet of pentagons and their center triangle has the same plane of rotation as the hexagon), which I then confirmed at its article. The information you just added it reinforced by the nets. Some time ago, when I was generalizing these solids to 4D I mainly interpreted the nets, and didn't have this information about how the icosidodecahedron was related to the rotunda and so forth. Around this same time I also noticed the wedging theme in constructing the "others" by looking at their nets, because when I saw the pictures of the solids my eye didn't group the faces by those wedges, but in the Bilunabirotunda ([[:File:Bilunabirotunda.png]]) for example first separating it along one of the hexagons crossing the midpoint, then grouping the faces of each piece into the front faces and back faces. ᛭ [[User:LokiClock|LokiClock]] ([[User talk:LokiClock|talk]]) 07:43, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
::::: p.s. on nets, the faces are colored by the symmetry, autogenerated by [[Stella (software)]], although manually made nets might pick different arrangements for seeing the figures better. [[User:Tomruen|Tom Ruen]] ([[User talk:Tomruen|talk]]) 02:13, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

:::::: Thanks, that's incredibly helpful to know about them! ᛭ [[User:LokiClock|LokiClock]] ([[User talk:LokiClock|talk]]) 10:23, 17 August 2013 (UTC)