Talk:Jones diagram

One of those

This is one of those articles where you can read it and still have no idea what they are talking about. Someone who knows more about the technical aspects of whatever this is might find this link useful, though it was the only non-Wikipedia relevant link I found on Google. If something isn't done with this relatively soon, I'll probably put it up for deletion. It isn't exactly the Zone System or anything. Recury 18:12, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the diagram link! I am new to Wikipedia, so please bear with me. I find the Jones diagram useful in general engineering work but had a very hard time finding information about it, so I posted what I had thinking others might be interested. I have not had time since to add more information. -Cxw 20:10, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, makes sense. It probably doesn't need a ton more information for right now, but what's already there should be clarified. Like I don't quite get what Jones diagrams would be used for in photography. And is the link that I posted an example of what you were talking about there? And in the second paragraph, what exactly makes a Jones diagram different from a normal graph? Recury 21:41, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have a handle on what it is now, and I've just made some style changes from your last edit and tried to clarify the language a bit. Recury 18:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misunderstanding of what an axis is

This page talks of axes as if they were rays. An axis is not a ray. An axis is a line. It is not sensible to talk of a "positive X axis", because the positive direction is only part of the axis. It is however correct to say "the positive portion of the X axis". The conventional Cartesian coordinate plane only has two axes.

I am about to rewrite some of the article to try to correct the error, and hopefully increase its readability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.242.232.209 (talk) 20:34, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]