Laurie wrote:
>I remembered a discussion a bit before that when there were two
>versions, one of which tended to present tunes as
>V:1
><a few bars - or was it even one bar>
>V:2
><a few bars>
>V:1
><a few bars>
>V:2
><a few bars>
>and another which did
>V:1
><whole tune>
>V:2
><whole tune>
>
>I remember Phil saying that to handle the one that he didn't
>you'd have to keep an internal copy of the whole score,
>which is of course exactly what Muse does.
>
That's correct. BarFly will currently only display the first version
correctly because it displays each line as it is parsed. It will
play either version. I'll probably support display of the second
version at some point in the future, but it means a major re-write.
Some other points of contention were:
* The interpretation of clefs other than the treble clef.
The introduction of the extended K: field which you already have in
Muse, and I will have in the next BarFly version fixes this rather
neatly, and also allows for the handling of transposing instruments.
* Whether the V: field should allow the tune on the same line as the
field identifier i.e.
V:1 abcd abcd |
V:2 ABCD ABCD |
as opposed to
V:1
abcd abcd |
V:2
abcd abcd |
BarFly currently allows either. I like the first for it's compactness,
and ease of comparing notes which form chords between the voices, but
no other programs can deal with it.
* Placing of initial voice-specific commands in V: fields in the header.
BarFly uses this mechanism for lots of purposes; other pargrams use
a combination of %%midi, %%staves and other such %% thingies in the
tune, or extend the V: field by putting commands on the V: line.
Phil Taylor
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
