Talk:Tatami

message: I want to point out that according to Japanese architecture students I have talked with the standard size of tatami is 910x1820 mm. I realize that it could be their regional standards (Tohoku, Yamagata), but they are quite sure that it is the current standard when building new houses. Just wanted to point it out as that size is not mentioned here.
You can also see this in the Japanese wikipage (http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%95%B3) where 910x1820mm is stated the standard size. Furthermore there is no mention of the size 900x1800mm.
As many people go here for reference I think it is extremely important that these figures be changed promptly. If however, someone has any objections please say so, as I dont want to change it without permission.
Lee3001 (talk) 13:25, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tatami size 

message: "Merge"-templates have been inserted in this article and in washitsu, without any explanation why they should be merged. Personally, I am not a big fan of the idea of merging. Tatami is a kind of mat, washitsu obviously a kind of room that is covered with tatami - but the washitsu has more specifics than just the mats, if I cover my floor with tatami they will not become washitsu. // Habj 21:32, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, a tatami is not a washitsu, nor is a washitsu a space covered with tatami. But maybe we can make a substantial article with a theme such as traditional Japanese homes (and an appropriate title). It would encompass washitsu, tatami, fusuma, shoji, Pocket door, and more and make a unified whole from a collection of stubs. Some of the stubs would disappear, while others might have reasons for staying separate. Fg2 07:17, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge? 

message: Should martial arts tatami be covered in this article or have its own? Originally straw tatami were used, but today tatami for budo purpose most often have a rubber surface and some kind of filling. Still, the origin is the same. // Habj 21:32, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It sounds like martial arts tatami should have a section in Mat mentioning its origin and present state. How does that sound? Fg2 07:17, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Budo tatami 

message: There is a photo (right, below) that says "Men Making Tatami Mats, late 1800s."
Maybe the title should be renamed as I doubt there is any color photographs from late 1800s. (You ment late 1900s?) Have a nice day.:)
:No, the date is definitely correct: .   Either the colour has been added, or it's an early colour picture (there were colour pictures being taken in early 20th century Russia, so it may well be the latter). HenryFlower 15:55, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wtf, all western corners are 90 degrees.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.122.63.142 (talk) 16:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture

message: My understanding is that Japanese houses are raised and the floor of the houses were wood. Although older/poorer houses had larger sections of dirt floors most of the living surfaces (stove, lounging areas, etc.) were plain wood and these were the ones that tatami was laid on. Sjschen 08:22, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wood or Dirt floors

message: It's hard as heck to walk on these things without making noise! Is that intentional?70.231.230.33 07:12, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I don't think so. But Nightingale floor is. Fg2 07:24, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alarm System? 

message: Does anyone know the approximate date when tatami morphed from individual cushions to actual floor coverings? Ninquerinquar 04:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time frame? 

message: Besides needing a citation, the claim of traditional sizes needs to explain what shape a 5½ mat room is supposed to be.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.208.173.144 (talk) 05:23, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  5½ mats? 

message: This whole section seems unnecessary. Tatami are flooring mats. This description, covered in the introductory paragraph, tells their use. I believe this section should be deleted.Tksb (talk) 11:36, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use 

message: Might the reason that having four corners touch (+) was considered inauspicious in the Edo period be the Tokugawas' anti-Christian policies? Hieronymus Illinensis (talk) 09:44, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inauspicious arrangements 

message: The article clearly defined what the difference between auspicious and inauspicious matting was; including that it was to differentiate between everyday use, and in the example, a funeral. It also mentions that to have a "good" tiling pattern,  you'll need half-mats to complete the brickwork pattern.
For those not using the brickwork arrangement, it is more convenient, but taboo, why would anyone recommend breaking the tradition of a custom? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.152.107.100 (talk) 09:13, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: arrangements