Idea to fix the cubing notation

[zed zed]

A few minutes ago, I proposed that MES be changed to follow RUF, on the r/Cubers discord. Many members jumped in to support this.

One member, Jeed, has been cubing for 5 years and average mid 9. Jeed has been confused and irritated by the illogic slice notations.

I'm sure many of you here have also been confused by the 3x3 notation, how S, z, F are the same direction, but M, x, R, and E, y, U are not.

It is important to keep notation as intuitive as possible, so the cuber, particularly beginners, can focus on the alg, not the moves.

I am proposing that we change the direction of slice letters, but add a prefix to denote that the sequence uses a fixed notation.

For example U perm, M2 U M' U2 M U M2, can be written as [FN] M2 U M U2 M' U M2

The prefix is [FN] because it doesnt conflict with the use of parenthesis ( ) to denote auf, alg angle, and triggers

 

[JaredRB9000]

True moment because LDF makes no sense

also now that I think about it maybe {FN} to avoid using [ ] because that's what comms are notated by

 

[Swagrid]

Was a little bewildered when I learned M follows L, looked up why, saw the logic behind the slices, never was confused again. Although it is confusing that first time tbf.

 

[DuckubingCuber347]

Was a little bewildered when I learned M follows L, looked up why, saw the logic behind the slices, never was confused again. Although it is confusing that first time tbf.

What was the logic?

 

[DGCubes]

I feel like this is one of those cases where we'd ideally have done it this way from the start, but now we're in too deep. For people who use the current system extensively and not just for a couple algs (e.g. advanced 3BLD solvers), it seems like it'd be too hard to ever read M as the current direction of M', regardless of whether the [FN] is there or not. I'm not an advanced blindsolver though so maybe someone else can chime in!

 

[JaredRB9000]

What was the logic?

I'd also like to know, since it had to be a conscious decision at some point to make M follow L instead of R. It's been killing me for years now.

 

[JaredRB9000]

I feel like this is one of those cases where we'd ideally have done it this way from the start, but now we're in too deep. For people who use the current system extensively and not just for a couple algs (e.g. advanced 3BLD solvers), it seems like it'd be too hard to ever read M as the current direction of M', regardless of whether the [FN] is there or not. I'm not an advanced blindsolver though so maybe someone else can chime in!

What if we write fixed notation in exclusively italic comic sans? Then there's truly no way to miss it and it definitely for real solves the issue.

 

[DuckubingCuber347]

I feel like this is one of those cases where we'd ideally have done it this way from the start, but now we're in too deep. For people who use the current system extensively and not just for a couple algs (e.g. advanced 3BLD solvers), it seems like it'd be too hard to ever read M as the current direction of M', regardless of whether the [FN] is there or not. I'm not an advanced blindsolver though so maybe someone else can chime in!

It was to late even in 2008

That's one of my biggest pet peeves. It's too late to change anything now, but if I had my way xyz would be reversed (to conform to the right hand rule of fields from physics) and MES would follow xyz. At least xyz uniformly correspond to a left hand rule of curl.

And the community is so much larger and this would effect so many more people. It's better just to leave it as is.

 

[JaredRB9000]

It was to late even in 2008

And the community so much larger and would effect so many more people. It's better just to leave as is.

In several hundred years when we're all long gone, my dream is for those who discover the Rubik's Cube once more to NOT HAVE TO DEAL WITH NONSENSICAL NOTATION DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE GRAVITY OF THE SITUATION????

 

[OreKehStrah]

What was the logic?

M follows L because it’s closer to L than R in the alphabet. Same for the other slices.

 

[zed zed]

It was to late even in 2008

And the community so much larger and would effect so many more people. It's better just to leave as is.

If the current notation is simply used changed without a signal, it will immediately affect many people. This is why fixed notation has a prefix, normal notation remains normal. This is to promote a smoother introduction for the community.
In short, the old notation is still around, but the fix will be around as an add-on.

 

[DuckubingCuber347]

If the current notation is simply used changed without a signal, it will immediately affect many people. This is why fixed notation has a prefix, normal notation remains normal. This is to promote a smoother introduction for the community.
In short, the old notation is still around, but the fix will be around as an add-on.

It's fine how it is really. Sure it may be a little confusing at first, but so is cubing. If you get used to the notation it becomes almost second nature. Of course, there are times when a different on could be better. But for the main notation I think it should stay the same.

 

[Lucas Garron]

I feel like this is one of those cases where we'd ideally have done it this way from the start, but now we're in too deep.

I think it's there subtle differences in where this reasoning is relevant, but it's a very powerful reason here.

I've worked a lot with notation (defining, standardizing, implementing), and I don't think it's possible to change M to its opposite without causing unreasonable trouble for the future. We have had no luck using context or other annotations disambiguating between two completely conflicting notations, and I don't think this situation would be any different. Everyone has to 100% know about the notation change and be diligent about it, or you end up in a situation where any alg with slices could be ambiguous.

I think the most likely way to make this work would be to introduce something like N = M' and Q = E'.
(I've seriously entertained this for alg.cubing.net / Twizzle, but as you can see I haven't adopted it yet.)

But no matter how we approach it, unless we can get the entire community to agree to a switchover *and* change all websites/databases (not to speak of forums, where we probably shouldn't bulk edit old posts), we'd be stuck with both old and new notation. And anyone who's learning notation afresh will have to learn *both* the old and the new to avoid any issues, which I think is a bigger burden for everyone than dealing with a slightly imperfect convention.

M follows L because it’s closer to L than R in the alphabet. Same for the other slices.

Yeah, this is the least confusing mnemonic I've heard:

• E follows D (both in the alphabet and in cubing)
• M follows L (both in the alphabet and in cubing)

... but it breaks down for "S follows F".

 

[trangium]

I think the most likely way to make this work would be to introduce something like N = M' and Q = E'

I would propose H (horizontal) for E', and V (vertical) for M'. S can stay the same.

For example, R U R' U' M' U R U' r' would become R U R' U' V U R U' r', and R' E2 R2 E' R' U R E R2 E2 R would become R' H2 R2 H R' U R H' R2 H2 R.

 

[zed zed]

I would propose H (horizontal) for E', and V (vertical) for M'. S can stay the same.

For example, R U R' U' M' U R U' r' would become R U R' U' V U R U' r', and R' E2 R2 E' R' U R E R2 E2 R would become R' H2 R2 H R' U R H' R2 H2 R.

that sounds great!

 

[DGCubes]

I would propose H (horizontal) for E', and V (vertical) for M'. S can stay the same.

For example, R U R' U' M' U R U' r' would become R U R' U' V U R U' r', and R' E2 R2 E' R' U R E R2 E2 R would become R' H2 R2 H R' U R H' R2 H2 R.

This is cool! Like Lucas said, I think it'd be important to use entirely new notation for these moves for the sake of clarity.

And anyone who's learning notation afresh will have to learn *both* the old and the new to avoid any issues.

If the community unanimously converted to H and V going forward*, I don't think this would be a huge problem. In the future most of our current resources will likely be archaic anyway, so the need to read M and E would only be required for the curious. It's similar to how some very old resources write Ui instead of U' (although H and V are a bit more extreme, and less "guessable").

* This is a very big if. It's immensely hard to get the community to go for any naming change (see: PR/WB, Varasano, Kibiminx) but it could theoretically be done. Even if it's successful, it'd definitely result in at least a couple years of people using both, and probably arguing about it.

 

[Lucas Garron]

I would propose H (horizontal) for E'

My first thoughts here are:

• H can be confused with "H perm". This doesn't cause huge issues with practice (as with "R perm"), but I think it's best to avoid conflict.
  • The most common slice-based H perms would actually use "V" in your suggestion, as opposed to H. I think this is likely to be confusing / annoying.
• H conflicts with HIJK notation: https://www.speedsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Team_Blindfolded#HIJK_.28F2L_Slots.29 . I don't know how widely it's used these days, but that would personally be a reason for me not to support it.

Not that a compromise isn't possible, but I just wanted to caution that there are unintended conflicts with a lot of otherwise reasonable choices.

I'd be curious to hear more from experienced Roux solves about this.

 

[Christopher Mowla]

A few minutes ago, I proposed that MES be changed to follow RUF, on the r/Cubers discord. Many members jumped in to support this.

The convention could go either way. It just depends on who you talk to. So I don't think it's a good idea to change it, despite that if it this would have been the convention from the beginning, I personally would have found it to be better.

I'm sure many of you here have also been confused by the 3x3 notation, how S, z, F are the same direction, but M, x, R, and E, y, U are not.

Compare L M to y L M y' and z L M z'. That's why. All three are literally the same. A similar argument could be made for what you prefer, but the old convention is not inconsistent/illogical.

It is important to keep notation as intuitive as possible, so the cuber, particularly beginners, can focus on the alg, not the moves.

I don't know what you define as a beginner, but if you are literally referring to those who are just learning the cube, I think minimizing the number of types of moves is going to be as easy as possible. (If a beginner learns a solution from someone, it's not at all intuitive.)

One member, Jeed, has been cubing for 5 years and average mid 9. Jeed has been confused and irritated by the illogic slice notations.

There are many cubers who have been cubing for 50 45 years, and many average much better than that. But all of them adapted the notation. I don't know what makes this generation an exception.

I think the most likely way to make this work would be to introduce something like N = M' and Q = E'.
(I've seriously entertained this for alg.cubing.net / Twizzle, but as you can see I haven't adopted it yet.)

No offense, Lucas, but I cannot tell you how much trouble you caused in the past by enforcing SiGN notation on your applets . . . when people who taught "the confused" were accustomed to old WCA. (And how much it confused beginners.) If they were thrown off by the case of a letter, how much more will they be thrown off by entirely new letters when looking to old forum posts, decades of cubing videos, etc.? I don't get it myself, but some cannot understand to click on a link to view the moves. They insist on (take pride in) reading the blue hyperlinked text to interpret the moves (despite that you pretty much made your applets available to use on every platform and device)!

It was to late even in 2008

And the community so much larger and would effect so many more people. It's better just to leave as is.

I couldn't have said it better. If people cannot adapt a notation, how can they adapt the more important (difficult) aspects of cubing anyway?

I would propose H (horizontal) for E', and V (vertical) for M'. S can stay the same.

Although not related, V has been used for multi-layer inner slices of Superset notation for 20+ years. (But they didn't name it V because of "vertical".)

But I think children (and therefore most people) are more familiar with the terms middle and equator rather than horizontal and vertical. So I think since we have L and R for left and right, and U for upper, the letters should represent the most universal of abstractions.

 

[zed zed]

The convention could go either way. It just depends on who you talk to. So I don't think it's a good idea to change it, despite that if it this would have been the convention from the beginning, I personally would have found it to be better.

I am in no way proposing a full replacement, just an optional modification and a prefix denoting the use of the modification.

I couldn't have said it better. If people cannot adapt a notation, how can they adapt the more important (difficult) aspects of cubing anyway?

People can adapt this less consistent notation, but isnt it the community's job to make the progression smoother for learners? consistency is one way to grease the progression.

Compare L M to y L M y' and z L M z'. That's why. All three are literally the same. A similar argument could be made for what you prefer, but the old convention is not inconsistent/illogical.

As said, it is not completely inconsistent, but can be improved.

I don't know what you define as a beginner, but if you are literally referring to those who are just learning the cube, I think minimizing the number of types of moves is going to be as easy as possible. (If a beginner learns a solution from someone, it's not at all intuitive.)

If it is to be learned, it should be made as easy to learn as possible.

 

[Christopher Mowla]

I am in no way proposing a full replacement or change, just an alternative and a prefix denoting the use of the alternative.

Due to the nature of the purpose of what notation serves, you technically are . . . that is, if everyone doesn't write an algorithm twice. Once in your version, once in the current version. (Where you provide links to animations like this in footnotes to describe what you're talking about.)

For example, in my 2 2-cycles document, I had to express algorithms in three different notations. Because:

• The interested individuals . . . who also contributed to the document . . . were familiar with SuperSet
• @Lucas Garron enforced SiGN on alg.cubing.net
• And I felt obligated (and myself prefer) algorithms written in Old WCA notation, because I know the majority of people know that.

So are you willing (and do you think the community as a whole is willing) to become "bilingual"? I have a lot of patience, but doing this kind of pushes me to my limit! And all solving guides (at least the part expressing moves in notation) will be at least twice as long, videos twice as long, etc.