So the clarity I am seeking is to understand what aspect of these functions do you see
that leads you to conclude one component to be more elemental than the other?
Partly, I don't think this is a pertinent question,
in that it suggests that we seek some Trvth of Things
rather than a way to talk about them --an invention
for a purpose, not something Out There 2 B discovered.
But, playing along with some *real* rationale for what
I said, I suppose one can point to concentration of forces,
and even other aspects --perhaps PET (post-eye tying)?--
that support such ranking.
For me, though, it really was just about what it is I want
to have a group of; and so I see this simple "central nipping
turn" as that, and for that component to work, there needs
to be stabilization by the tail's return knotting --but THAT
need not be only a bight.
(Then, though, I am also willing to walk away from the
mere "turNip" for like structures, even non-PET ones,
with, well, "likeness" to the simple loop. For this, it
might be that I come up with some nominal distinction.)
Without the Nipping Helix, ...
And here I want to push back against the
helix aspect
of the "central nipping
loop", because it is a helix
of necessity rather than *ideal* (one might be able to
avoid this by reeving through hollow braided rope!),
and should the helix open much,
then I don't like classifying it as a "bowline" --though
I have pointed out that quite obvious #1010 bowlines
have lost their essence in this way, into
"pile-hitch
nooses" ! --a matter of force, & transformation.
<sigh>
But, really, I have AIMED for stabilizing a rather open
helix, and don't find it quite so "nipping" as a loop,
for, being open, there isn't the compression of one
side vs an opposite.
Would that things were black'n'white, present or not,
rather than sometimes tenuous dependent upon loading,
but ... such is life/knots.
Back to the top point, though :: what is it we want from
our nomenclature? Yours seems to give us so little in
denotation, almost no collection; mine reaches to a group
of "like" knots, and maybe by a Xarax rule they are further
constrained to be PET?! And then the
water bowlinemaybe gets in with some relaxation of pure "nipping turn",
and the
"cloverhand bowline" has *attachment*/proximity
to this grouping though it's not PET ("cloverhand" being an
overhandoriented to resemble the
clove h.; and
which for the eye knot seems to offer some slack-security
and nice curving of the SPart).
--dl*
====