Knitting pattern rants
Aug. 30th, 2017 09:03 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ysobelI apparently have some issues with how knitting patterns are written. These are all swirly standardized wordings but they're wrongitu wrong wrong.
1) "at each end". Often used with increases or decreases: inc 1 st at each end of next and foll 14 alt rows, or whatever. (Non-abbreviated version: increase 1 stitch at each end of the next row and following 14 alternate rows.) This is not technically incorrect, but it is very easy to read as "at end", which then leads to increasing on only one side rather than both. ("each end" is first and last stitch, or thereabouts; "end" is just the last stitch.) It would be better to say "at both ends", because pluralizing end→ends gives another clue that it's multiple, well, ends.
2) "Repeat X times". This can happen withon a line, eg "* k1 p1 k12 p1, repeat from * 8 times", or over multiple lines, where a several row pattern is defined and then it says "Repeat rows 1-10 6 times". The problem is, it's ambiguous as to whether it's X times *total* or X times *more*. (The "total" applies more often to the multi-row situations, where they define the pattern and then tell you how many times to do it, but I've seen it done both ways.) It would be so much clearer to say "repeat X times more", if not "Repeat X times more (X+1 times total".
3) "No stitch" squares in charts. The tl;dr is that charts are gross, whereas knitting is more flexible; to get things to line up right, sometimes spacer squares are needed. I totally grok it but it throws people off all the time -- Ravelry is sometimes like knitting tech support, lol -- and the terminology is misleading. It's more of a "no action" square than a no stitch square. Meh.
4) How gauge is generally described. This is less a pattern rant and more a knitting standardization rant, but: Gauge is usually described as X stitches and Y rows over 4 inches. The problem is, it is very very hard to judge partial stitches. I mean, okay, it's pretty straightforward to tell the difference between a whole stitch and a half stitch, but finer measurements are hard. Quarter stitch vs a third of a stitch is hard to distinguish visually, but if you have something 500 stitches wide, that can get significant. (Plus, it can be counterintuitive for some people that if you have a larger gauge, eg 24 stitches in 4" rather than 21 in 4", you need to go up a needle size.) It is much much easier to measure the *length* of X stitches. Instead of "24 stitches in 4 inches", you'd do "21 stitches in 3.5 inches". Same spi value, but it's easier to measure fractions of an inch (since they're marked on rulers) than fractions of a stitch, and it's more obvious that your knitting is turning out tighter (or looser as the case may be).
...yeah. Opinions. *grin* Sadly I have no influence over these things, and my gauge-measuring suggestions never seem to catch on.
What I do not have the time to rant about because it is way more detailed than I have the brain for tonight: stitch mount, "correctness", mount-neutral language, and actions va results. Yes that's all one rant.
What is not technically a rant but still a thing I want to write up someday, if I can figure out how: why knitting patterns are like computer programs (including subroutines and for-loops and goto triggers and if statements).
1) "at each end". Often used with increases or decreases: inc 1 st at each end of next and foll 14 alt rows, or whatever. (Non-abbreviated version: increase 1 stitch at each end of the next row and following 14 alternate rows.) This is not technically incorrect, but it is very easy to read as "at end", which then leads to increasing on only one side rather than both. ("each end" is first and last stitch, or thereabouts; "end" is just the last stitch.) It would be better to say "at both ends", because pluralizing end→ends gives another clue that it's multiple, well, ends.
2) "Repeat X times". This can happen withon a line, eg "* k1 p1 k12 p1, repeat from * 8 times", or over multiple lines, where a several row pattern is defined and then it says "Repeat rows 1-10 6 times". The problem is, it's ambiguous as to whether it's X times *total* or X times *more*. (The "total" applies more often to the multi-row situations, where they define the pattern and then tell you how many times to do it, but I've seen it done both ways.) It would be so much clearer to say "repeat X times more", if not "Repeat X times more (X+1 times total".
3) "No stitch" squares in charts. The tl;dr is that charts are gross, whereas knitting is more flexible; to get things to line up right, sometimes spacer squares are needed. I totally grok it but it throws people off all the time -- Ravelry is sometimes like knitting tech support, lol -- and the terminology is misleading. It's more of a "no action" square than a no stitch square. Meh.
4) How gauge is generally described. This is less a pattern rant and more a knitting standardization rant, but: Gauge is usually described as X stitches and Y rows over 4 inches. The problem is, it is very very hard to judge partial stitches. I mean, okay, it's pretty straightforward to tell the difference between a whole stitch and a half stitch, but finer measurements are hard. Quarter stitch vs a third of a stitch is hard to distinguish visually, but if you have something 500 stitches wide, that can get significant. (Plus, it can be counterintuitive for some people that if you have a larger gauge, eg 24 stitches in 4" rather than 21 in 4", you need to go up a needle size.) It is much much easier to measure the *length* of X stitches. Instead of "24 stitches in 4 inches", you'd do "21 stitches in 3.5 inches". Same spi value, but it's easier to measure fractions of an inch (since they're marked on rulers) than fractions of a stitch, and it's more obvious that your knitting is turning out tighter (or looser as the case may be).
...yeah. Opinions. *grin* Sadly I have no influence over these things, and my gauge-measuring suggestions never seem to catch on.
What I do not have the time to rant about because it is way more detailed than I have the brain for tonight: stitch mount, "correctness", mount-neutral language, and actions va results. Yes that's all one rant.
What is not technically a rant but still a thing I want to write up someday, if I can figure out how: why knitting patterns are like computer programs (including subroutines and for-loops and goto triggers and if statements).