Steve Mansfield wrote:
> Guido Gonzato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote :
>
>>> That's all: there is no need to have more information in this field.
>>> Now, let's focus on the printing (%%staves -> s: ?) and playing
>>> (%%MIDI -> m: ?) information fields...
>>
>> I guess somebody might argue that these fields shouldn't be part of abc,
>> since they deal with specific music features like typesetting and playing.
>
>
> Absolutely. The definition as proposed summarises the (IMHO) consensus
> over the usage of the V: field to delineate voices in multi-part music. Let us
> please not drown that model of clarity in a heap of application-specific
> instructions!
Personally, I strongly feel that %%staves ought to be in there as a real
header. Also, I have found the V:clef={treble|alto|...} name="whatever"
subname="whatever" fields to be very useful. We should probably
enumerate more precisely what the allowed clefs are.
I'm less picky about the %%MIDI stuff (except that the %%MIDI program
directive is useful), although I think that James Allwright's
I:octave=-2 proposal (or something like that) ought to make it in, or
else we'll still have endless debates about clef transposition and an
ill-defined standard to boot. :)
- Eric
--
---=---=-=-==-===-=====//=======//=========-===-==-=-=--=---- <>< -
"God is real, unless // Name: // Eric Galluzzo // [EMAIL PROTECTED]
declared integer." // WWW: // http://w3.one.net/~eng/
-- Unknown // Work: // Synchrony // Product Engineer
---=-=-==-===-=====//=======//=========-===-==-=-=--=-------- <>< -
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
