krtisfranks wrote:
> Why restrict this to polygons (two-dimensional space)? I would see this
> most as star polytopes, which is to say that the domain of reference is
at
> least the set of all shapes given by Schlafli symbols that are
well-formed
> and which contain at least one positive non-integer rational number
(quite
> possibly in coprime ("lowest") terms); furthermore, it is possible that
> various trivial reductions could be allowed (for example, lines and
convex
> polytopes could be considered to be stars without indentations) - I would

> not disallow these possibilities.
> If we keep it to two-dimensions and keep them regular, than all we need
is
> the number of outer vertices and how they are connected (is it every
other,
> every three, etc.?); my comments about trivial cases still applies. But I

> also think that that it could be useful to have the terbri for outer and
> inner vertices (as you basically already do, although I am not sure that
> they actually are vertices) because they can now easily be referenced via

> conversion.
>
>
> What is the etymology?

Ignore this

>
>
> Aside: I was actually just thinking about how this should be a gismu the
> other day. I even told my friend about it. Stars have been on my mind
> lately because of my research.