On Thu, 16 Nov 2000, Laura Conrad wrote:
> Either I don't understand what you're proposing, or you aren't talking
> about the same thing as the rest of us. How do you let the person
> printing the score control what accidentals are printed without
> providing a syntax for doing so?
>
> The (^) syntax is precisely a method for the person who wants to print
> a sharp in parentheses to specify this. Whether the sharp is one that
> the program would figure out to add or not. What's your idea for how
> to get this?
The syntax being discussed is nothing but a way of saying, "this accidental
isn't really necessary."
We don't NEED a syntax to say that, the musical necessity of the
accidental can be determined purely from its context. From
there, it's trivial to provide software switches or parameters to decide what to
do with accidentals that aren't musically necessary (throw them away, print
them, or print them in parens). It's even pretty simple to add software options
that do things like "put helper accidentals in the first two measures after any
bar where a note was altered and not restored" -- thus adding helper
accidentals even when they aren't present in the source.
Again, doing it this way leaves it up to the person who will be printing, and
presumably playing from, the score. So, if you don't like helper accidentals
and I do, we can each have our cake and eat it too.
--
John Atchley
----------------------------------
<http://www.guitarnut.com>
<http://www.guitarnuts.com>
So many guitars, so little time...
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
