On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Bernard Hill wrote: > >Is "K:D exp _b _e ^f" different from "K:D _b _e ^f" ? > >Where does this come from, has it been mentioned before ? > > As I have always understood the standard, the accidentals following it > *modify* the key sig. So > > K:D _b _e ^f actuall leaves also a c^. The point of the exp is to > *override* the normal key sig of D.
You have fully understood it. I think that the problems of possible ambiguity in key signature notation are now solved. I suggest that we move on to discuss the other features that are proposed in the new standard: http://www.joods.nl/~chazzanut/abc/abc2-draft.html Groeten, Irwin Oppenheim [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~~~* Chazzanut Online: http://www.joods.nl/~chazzanut/ To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
