Guido Gonzato writes: | On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, I. Oppenheim wrote: | > > > X:1 | > > > T:Shenei Zeitim | > > > M:4/4 | > > > K:C | > > > G|G2G2A4|(FEF) D (A2G) G| [M:4/4] [K:C] | > > > c2c2(B2c2)|(f2e2)e2d G| | > > > w:She-nei zei-tim nich-__ra-tim_ \ | > > > w:be-gan na-'ul_ yats-_hi-ru. Le- | > > > G|G2G2A4|(FEF) D (A2G) G|\ | > > > w:She-nei zei-tim nich-__ra-tim_ be-\ | > > > M:4/4 % Measure Change\ | > > > K:C % Key Change\ | > > > c2c2(B2c2)|(f2e2)e2d G| | > > > w:gan na-'ul_ yats-_hi-ru. Le- | | So you're trying to apply 20 syllables to 9 notes. Let's join the first | two music lines, which sum up to 20 notes. This is what you probably meant | to write: | | X:1 | T:Shenei Zeitim | M:4/4 | K:C | G|G2G2A4|(FEF) D (A2G) G| [M:4/4] [K:C] c2c2(B2c2)|(f2e2)e2d G| | w:She-nei zei-tim nich-__ra-tim_ \ | w:be-gan na-'ul_ yats-_hi-ru. Le- | G|G2G2A4|(FEF) D (A2G) G|\ | w:She-nei zei-tim nich-__ra-tim_ be-\ | M:4/4 % Measure Change\ | K:C % Key Change\ | c2c2(B2c2)|(f2e2)e2d G| | w:gan na-'ul_ yats-_hi-ru. Le- | | this typesets perfectly with abcm2ps, passably with yaps, and badly with | jcabc2ps.
Yeah; jcabc2ps implements the simple-minded "continued on next line" scheme from the new proposed standard. Here's how it would work: X:1 T:TEST:Shenei Zeitim M:4/4 K:C G|G2G2A4|(FEF) D (A2G) G|\ [M:4/4] [K:C] c2c2(B2c2)|(f2e2)e2d G| w:She-nei zei-tim nich-__ra-tim_ \ be-gan na-'ul_ yats-_hi-ru. Le- G|G2G2A4|(FEF) D (A2G) G|\ [M:4/4]\ [K:C ]\ c2c2(B2c2)|(f2e2)e2d G| w:She-nei zei-tim nich-__ra-tim_ be-\ gan na-'ul_ yats-_hi-ru. Le- One problem with this scheme, of course, is that \ at the end of a comment appends the next line to the comment. This is easy to understand, but it does mean that it's difficult to have embedded comments as was done above. This is one of the reasons why a lot of languages have "bracketing" comment delimiters, often in addition to the "to end of line" comments like abc's % comments. Also, note the missing w: on the continuation lines. If you include the initial w:, it will be taken as the start of a new syllable. | In conclusion: if you don't like the \ mechanism, fine: I can't have you | change your mind. But the example you provided was wrong. I wouldn't be so hard on Irwin. When I see this sort of confusion about how a mechanism is supposed to work, I find it more useful to observe that the mechanism is too complex. It's common for people to design something far too complex for its users, and then say "user error" when they misuse it. This is the common excuse for lots of disasters that were actually caused by an unusable design. Rather than feeling smug about how stupid the users are, I'd much rather design something that's simple enough that they will use it right. This isn't so much a matter of "right" and "wrong"; it's more a matter of where you want to place the blame when it doesn't work right, and how you want to fix the problem. (BTW, it would be better to have an example where the meter and key really do change. I can't tell from the output whether jcabc2ps is correctly handling the "key changes", since failure produces the same output as success in this example.) To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
