In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Phil Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writesa) Symbols can be on notes, rests and bar lines
Bad Idea. This breaks all existing programs which support aligned words, and any existing files which include aligned words and rests.
Forgive my ignorance, why is this a bad idea? Have I misunderstood the spec? I'm writing my parser/player/display program. I've already implemented the above and it was not hard to achieve (I can make the symbols attach to anything in the markup, pretty much).
Then anyone who uses your program to make abcs with aligned words will find that their files don't work properly with any other software. Likewise they will find that in any files they download from the net the lyrics won't align properly.
As far as I can see this doesn't answer the second question (am I mistaken, or are you just disagreeing with ABC2.0 and not my interpretation of it), and only states that the proposed ABC2.0 spec is more advanced than the programs to which you refer (but do not name) in their current state. This is no more different than putting an ABC file with V: voicing into ABCWin - it doesn't like it. I don't think anyone is claiming ABCWin is broken because the standard has advanced past its capabilities.
My program will be backwards compatible. If you've aligned your words on notes that is fine. Using my app you can align on notes/rests/barlines as the spec dictates.
I made a mistake in my previous posting. The ABC2.0 draft spec actually includes "note groups" and doesn't specifically disallow grace notes. Given that the spec does not define "note group" (or if it does I haven't found it), I am not sure if a note group is
a) ABC
which is notes next to each other
b) [ABC]
which is chords
c) {abc}
which is grace notes - these are clearly "grouped" in one sense.
d) either of (a) (b) (c)
I can't see the value in (c), especially if you've listened to music with grace notes, putting symbols to accent them even more is "optimisitic" from the playing point of view, and from the singing point of view, well...
Putting symbols on notes in a chord would be counter productive, but you could just stack them above/below each other as the spec states for multiple symbols per note. Given that a rest/invisible rest/inaudible rest are all forms of note (if you look at the spec for a note) and chords are groups of notes, my previous posting omitted groups of notes because the fundamental unit in my approach is a note. Hence to me groups of notes implies notes anyway.
If "note group" means (a) I would think that it means align on the first note of the group. If (b) I'd assume just align on the chord.
I couldn't see (from reading 1.7.6 and 2.0) what the difference was, except that 2.0 provided me with more information to work with (i.e. 2.0 stated it was notes/rests/bar lines, where as I don't 1.7.6 stating that (implying it was everything).
As far as I can see all of the existing standards mention only lyrics aligning with notes, and while they specifically state that gracenotes are not included, make no mention of rests or bar lines. Existing software (e.g. BarFly and abcm2ps) interpret this to mean that rests and bar lines are to be skipped. Admittedly the standards are a little ambiguous here, but there is a well-established precedent, and lots of files which will be broken if you make a different interpretation.
I don't see how extending a definition breaks things. The old files will still play/display correctly, and the existing software such as the two you mention (especially BarFly, a commercial app) will be extended to handle the new standard. In any other walk of life we accept that new standards require backwards compatibility, and expect the software vendors to provide this.
I want to implement the spec as written. I've already commented (in a different thread) that I think the spec(s) (all that I have seen) are too loose. ABC2.0 drafts states notes/rests/barlines/groups of notes, etc. I'm as happy to see barlines struck out as I am to see them retained. I don't have any strong feeling either way. The software, as written, can handle either outcome.
people want. My understanding was notes/rests/bar lines. If I've misunderstood, please tell me and provide clarification as to what the standard is.
There are lots of examples of songs with aligned words at <http://folkinfo.org/songs/>.
OK, I think this is examples of files conforming to 1.7.6.
If your software displays these correctly then you're on the right lines. If not, please think again!
Certainly. I'm only interested in implementing ABC2.0 and possibly pointing out areas I think are fuzzy. I'm absolutely not interested in trying to add my own bits to ABC (not that I can think of anything to add anyway - I am not that advanced a musician).
Stephen -- Stephen Kellett Object Media Limited http://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk RSI Information: http://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk/rsi.html To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
