• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

Standard Lettering Scheme for Reference

Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
2,068
Likes
6
Location
Toronto (Canada)
WCA
2009HOLT01
YouTube
riffz
Thread starter #1
<Riffz> I hate talking about cycles in terms of 3 letters per piece
<Riffz> I'd actually rather we chose a simple standard lettering scheme just for discussion lol
<Riffz> I'd still find it easier to think about
<Spef> zomg
<Spef> we should

For me personally, I hate talking discussing BLD algs by typing things like ULB->FRD->LDB. It's time consuming and I often read them wrong. When posting the occasional alg, this notation is consistent and good to use, but when you're sending algs back and forth on IRC or posting a large amount of them, it's extremely annoying IMO.

Spef and I propose the following lettering scheme for cube pieces just for the sake of making discussion easier:

For any piece, start on the U face at the back left corner (for corners and x-centers) or at the back (for edges and +-centers) and work your way clockwise around that face, giving each piece a letter.

Then move to the F face and repeat, followed by the L, B, R, and D faces. The first piece on D would be DLF for corners, DF for edges.

So for corners we would have:

ULB = A
UBR = B
URF = C
UFL = D

FLU = E
FUR = F
FRD = G
FDL = H

and so on.

For edges:

UB = A
UR = B
UF = C
UL = D

FU = E
FR = F
FD = G
FL = H


And...

<Spef> just **** wings
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
540
Likes
0
Location
Phoenix
#3
its easy once read... may be a pain to type, but even more a pain when you have to decode. i guess if you're having a long BLD discussion, like you were just having. . .

edit: perhaps anyone within discussion could have a simple printout or a webpage that would mark stickers with the letternames to refer to?

for example, post a picture of a cube and then on the sticker place your letters. . .
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
2,159
Likes
10
Location
IOWA
WCA
2010COLA01
YouTube
CyroKarat
#5
its easy once read... may be a pain to type, but even more a pain when you have to decode. i guess if you're having a long BLD discussion, like you were just having. . .
It'll probably be like normal notation. Once you get used to it, you'll skip the decoding step and think in terms of A-H.
 
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
2,068
Likes
6
Location
Toronto (Canada)
WCA
2009HOLT01
YouTube
riffz
Thread starter #6
its easy once read... may be a pain to type, but even more a pain when you have to decode. i guess if you're having a long BLD discussion, like you were just having. . .
I don't think it would take very long to skip the decoding step and just think of the stickers as letters.

Cyrus: The corners/x-centers don't end at I... There's 24 of each piece. It's usually pretty clear due to context / use of slice moves what type of pieces you're referring to in discussion anyway.
 

cmhardw

Premium Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
4,106
Likes
134
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
WCA
2003HARD01
#7
<Spef> just **** wings
I don't get it... Your definition fits perfectly with wings, why would you leave them unlettered? If you start at the same corner, and work clockwise lettering the wings in the same way, you letter all the wings.

So:
UBl = A
URb = B
UFr = C
ULf = D

FUl = E
FRu = F
FDr = G
FLd = H

RUf = I
RBu = J
RDb = K
RFd = L

BUr = M
BLu = N
BDl = O
BRd = P

LUb = Q
LFu = R
LDf = S
LBd = T

DBr = U
DLb = V
DFl = W
DRf = X

Everything follows the same scheme, always starting at the upper left corner when looking at a face. Just remember that DBR is considered the upper left corner when looking at D.

I like the overall idea of a lettering scheme, but for this to work this has to go into the Wiki.

Chris
 
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
2,068
Likes
6
Location
Toronto (Canada)
WCA
2009HOLT01
YouTube
riffz
Thread starter #8
Chris, that's exactly what I was thinking, but I thought it was still a little less clear than for edges/corners/centers, so I left it out. Thanks for explaining so I didn't have to.

I'll look at adding it into the wiki, but I'd like to see some more feedback to determine whether people would actually bother using this or not.
 
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Messages
2,010
Likes
4
#11
Nevermind, I was confused by UB=A

I would do it like this, actually:


In my opinion it's easier to pick a direction, (clockwise), and those all go clockwise around that corner.

EDIT: The advantage of this way is that each piece is named similarly. A, in this scheme, would be ULB (corner), UL (edge), ULb (wing), Ulb (x center), Ul (+ center).

With what Riffz and Chris are saying, A would be ULB, UB, UBl, and probably Ulb and Ub. However if you switch to notating pieces counterclockwise then you get UBL, UB, UBl, Ubl, Ub, which is the exact same; the only difference is that I go clockwise for consistency. If you're going clockwise around the face to label letters doesn't it make sense to go clockwise for everything else?
 
Last edited:

Mike Hughey

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
9,875
Likes
1,897
Location
Indianapolis
WCA
2007HUGH01
YouTube
MikeHughey1
#12
At first, I thought it matched my lettering scheme exactly, then I saw you do the faces in a different order. (I do U F R B L D.) Oh, well. It's still fairly close to my lettering scheme.

On the visual, did you get the G and H corners mixed up?
 

cmhardw

Premium Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
4,106
Likes
134
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
WCA
2003HARD01
#13
I think whatever scheme we use should be exactly the same idea for all piece types. I can promise that I will put absolutely no effort into learning a new scheme. If there is one simple rule that I can follow to derive the standard lettering scheme then I will do that, and use it in all my posts referring to BLD cycles. I have switched my personal lettering so many times that I absolutely refuse to learn a new one at this point, even if it is a standard one.

This concept needs to be simple, and easy to implement, or I don't think it will be worth doing. Remember this method is not to be used for solving. It is to be used for writing down cycles on the forum.
 
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
2,068
Likes
6
Location
Toronto (Canada)
WCA
2009HOLT01
YouTube
riffz
Thread starter #14
At first, I thought it matched my lettering scheme exactly, then I saw you do the faces in a different order. (I do U F R B L D.) Oh, well. It's still fairly close to my lettering scheme.

On the visual, did you get the G and H corners mixed up?
Yes, I did. I just removed it for now because I don't have time to fix it lol. And yea, UFRBLD was a consideration, but I think the proposed order fits the whole theme of everything being ordered in a clockwise direction. (I know this might be confusing for you, since it's the same on every face other than L/R.)
 
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
2,068
Likes
6
Location
Toronto (Canada)
WCA
2009HOLT01
YouTube
riffz
Thread starter #16
I think whatever scheme we use should be exactly the same idea for all piece types. I can promise that I will put absolutely no effort into learning a new scheme. If there is one simple rule that I can follow to derive the standard lettering scheme then I will do that, and use it in all my posts referring to BLD cycles. I have switched my personal lettering so many times that I absolutely refuse to learn a new one at this point, even if it is a standard one.

This concept needs to be simple, and easy to implement, or I don't think it will be worth doing. Remember this method is not to be used for solving. It is to be used for writing down cycles on the forum.
Exactly my thought process, which is why I don't like Aron's suggestion.

EDIT: Mike: I knew you'd want to extend it to >5x5 centers! :D

I'm going to stop spamming the refresh button for now but I'll check this thread again before I go to bed.
 

cmhardw

Premium Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
4,106
Likes
134
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
WCA
2003HARD01
#17
I agree that this should work for obliques, by the way. If we're going to make a scheme like this, let's do it well right from the start.

How about the scheme that has already been posted on the first page? Basically start at the upper left and work clockwise around?

We could do the same with obliques. Would we start with the letter A, on 6x6, as U(2l)(3b), and U(3l)(2b) which would be A for each oblique orbit?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Messages
2,010
Likes
4
#18
How doesn't my suggestion label each piece the same? I picked a standard direction and applied it.

This is how I would apply it to 7x7:


The purple centers are something else to discuss; "Ublw" (the one on the left) or "Ulb". The latter is kind of ugly because it flips from the standard, but it's also closer to that corner.
 

cmhardw

Premium Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
4,106
Likes
134
Location
Atlanta, Georgia
WCA
2003HARD01
#19
How doesn't my suggestion label each piece the same? I picked a standard direction and applied it.
It seems to work fine. So we pick this wedge shaped block around the UBL corner and label everything A (in each different orbit). Then we work clockwise around the face through D as if you're looking directly at that face. Moving then to the F face do the same, then R face, then B face, then L face, then D face. The basis corner for D is the DBR corner when viewed after a z2 cube rotation.

Any objections to this? Going once? Going twice?

I don't really care how close or not close this is to my actual lettering scheme. To be perfectly honest this is incredibly different from my personal lettering scheme. However, the simple rule or process stated above can allow someone to not memorize this scheme, but derive it every time when writing out cycles on the forum.

I think it's a great idea, are we agreed? Or does anyone have any objection?

Chris
 
Last edited:

Mike Hughey

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
9,875
Likes
1,897
Location
Indianapolis
WCA
2007HUGH01
YouTube
MikeHughey1
#20
I think it's fine, too. (My lettering scheme is closer to the one on the first page, but honestly, Aron's seems more consistent.)

But Chris, you didn't answer the question about the purple ones. I prefer the one on the right because then every piece on any sized cube sort of fits in the same "quadrant".
 
Top