User blog comment:Ubersketch/A proposal for a standard/@comment-35470197-20190811012241/@comment-35470197-20190812210103

> True, perhaps it would be better to make a new OCF?

Maybe you have not read arguments above.

> I don't see how complexity FS aren't ordinal notations

I have told so many times what you call "an ordinal notation" is not an ordinal notation. I am not interested in repeating the same explanation. Could you read the definition of the notion of an ordinal notation before you talk about it? Maybe I will not answer the same question anymore. Maybe I will not answer your question like "why this FS is not an ordinal notation?", because my answer seems not to help you. I just list problems, because it is non-sense to discuss them before you understand the definition. It is not just pain. Your "definition" does not provide any computation rule of the ordering or the FS.
 * 1) An ordinal notation is not a fundamental sequence.
 * 2) A length/complexity-based FS is not provided an alogorithm to compute.
 * 3) Your definition includes circular logic, which is not solved by recursion.