Talk:Ropelength

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I was wandering whether we should use the term 'ropelength' as written together, since this is how most of literature, I have seen, used. Iswyn 02:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

First, thank you for writing this article. Second, I believe we should move to "ropelength". Someone moved the article to "rope length" claiming it was 10 time times more common in Google Scholar. However, when I looked in Google Scholar, it was clear a majority of the hits had very little to do with this knot theoretic idea of rope length, and even the ones that did were mainly not by knot theorists. A Google scholar search for ' "rope length" + knot' and weeding out extraneous hits (such as patent applications on rope using devices) is more revealing. In comparison, a Google Scholar search for "ropelength" brings up far more knot theoretic hits, and it's clear that many of the foundational papers use "ropelength". I would say the "10 times more common" claim is in favor of "ropelength". Since I cannot move pages yet, I will ask an admin to do so. --Horoball 02:04, 28 September 2007 (UTC)