What I meant was Bb major pentatonic/ G-7 pentatonic inversion.
Once you say Major pentatonic, people usually know you mean 1 2 3 5 6
which is a major 6(9) chord.
When you say Min7 pentatonic scales... it's assumed that one means
1 b3 4 5 b7 or a Min7(11) chord.
Again, I'm not dismissing your presentation... but simply presenting how I and a lot of other improvisers conceptualize them. When improvising, offen you're superimposing chord on chord. It's easier to think of them as min7/maj6 chords.
c d e g a - Am7/Em7
Am7 yes..... Emin7....sorta.... but you have a b6 in there. That only works over certain minor7 chords.... ie III-7 or VI-7. It wouldn't work in a dorian context....
From a compositional standpoint, it's entirely useful to see each pentatonic scale inversion as it's own entity and not derivative of another chord/scale. Some have more tensions than chord tones. You can construct pentatonic voicings out of them which can really add an unusal flavor.
Again with the sharps vs flats.... it only matters on paper. Sonically they sound the same.
If you are as you say writing a book... the ultimate goal is to make it useable and understandable as possible.... not to show how musically grammatical you are.
Sometimes rules like sharps ascending and flats descending get in the way. That's used mainly for actual music notation... not musical spelling.
IE G Bb C D F vs G A# C D F
you can immediately see the G-7 application in the former... it then becomes a lot more useful. You would never write the spelling of G-7 as G A# C D F.
If I was comparing your method with Jerry's... I would relate a lot more to the way Jerry presents them. He's a world class improviser and he actually uses the stuff. The way he presents them in chord fashion is really easy to see their applications.
Double flats and double sharps gets even more pointless because we're talking theoretical keys. They're simply impractical in most (not all) situations.