On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, I. Oppenheim wrote:
So, Jef and Guido, what do you think? Are you willing
to discuss your ideas with us?
I'll just give you my point of view. Since the latest draft three years
ago, the so called 'committee' hasn't produced a single line of text;
please correct me if I'm
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Frank Nordberg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Just wanted to let you know that the ABC applications database is now
updated (or will be in a few minutes at least - uploading as I write this).
It's two days later than I originally planned. The reason is that I
decided I
Bernard Hill wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Frank Nordberg
P.S. In case anybody's forgotten already, the URL is:
http://www.musicaviva.com/abc/abcapps/index.tpl
On accessing that my browser gives:
Error: template 'D:/MusicMiva/wwwroot/abc/abcapps/index.tpl' not found
The correct URL is:
Bert van Vreckem wrote:
The committee in itself is a good idea [...], but if we want the
standard to go forward, there should be only one leader
OK, agreed. So can we decide on that and go forward?
After what Guido wrote (quoted below) I feel he should be the
leader.
Guido wrote:
We're
Another thing I think should maybe be changed is that
abc.sourceforge.net becomes the official ABC home page. It
doesn't have to contain everything that's on Chris Walshaw's page
now, but could link to useful resources that essentially contain the
same information, such as Frank's ABC
Henrik Norbeck wrote:
Another thing I think should maybe be changed is that
abc.sourceforge.net becomes the official ABC home page. It
doesn't have to contain everything that's on Chris Walshaw's page
now, but could link to useful resources that essentially contain the
same information, such
Guido Gonzato wrote:
To sum up, call me the coordinator if you wish; but bear in mind that
you're free to toss my work and dedication out of the window if you wish,
I'll not get upset. I just believe that with a bit of coordination - I did
nothing more than this - we'll soon have the new standard.
From: Bernard Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The problem as a developer is that we're second-guessing writers
of
bad abc notation.
A concise way of putting it. :-)
We're in a slightly different boat from some of the others though.
If people want to write abc and read it using Notepad (or other
From: John Chambers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Actually, my main reasoning is that of a programmer: If we
want
everyone to implement this U: header, it should be as simple
as
possible. A string substitution is about as simple as it gets,
and
very easy to implement in just about any
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Bert Van Vreckem wrote:
Indeed. Guido, what do you think of this? If you want I can give you
Admin permissions for the abc project. At least part of your abcplus
project would fit nicely in the abc project if the new standard kicks
off. I should also have some time in
Emerging from a long hibernation to say how glad I am to see that a great
deal of sense is being talked about the possibilities for a new standard;
especially by some of the newer members of this list.
I am not am abcm2ps user but, as far as I understand it, Jean-François is
doing brilliant
Hi John,
| Unfortunately, the hacek and breve accents did not seem to work with my
| versions of either abc2ps or jcabc2ps when I tried them yesterday
| (guessing, then), they were just rendered as 'u' or 'v' preceding the
| would-be-accented letter. I'll have to check versions when I'm back
From: Bert Van Vreckem
Good point. While Guido's abc manual deserves all the praise it gets, it
is rather Linux-centric. But Guido is a Linux man, so perhaps someone
else should write a section on how to set up abc under Windows. I use
Linux myself, so I don't have a clue about which abc
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I fundamentally disagree with this. I believe that
it is imperative that the standard and the software
that uses it should be isolated.
I agree with you. I had already a bit of argument about
this with Phil. The standard should define an abstract
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Webber
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Whilst, I gather, various applications tend to put output into
postscript, the abc standard should be completely independent of
postscript as most Windows users have never heard of it!
Seconded.
imo abc is a format for
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jon Freeman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
As for Windows instructions for running these programs I seem to remember
Steve Mansfield comming up with something, via wordpad and macros?
http://www.lesession.co.uk/abc/abcm2psOnWindows.htm
82 hits in June, so there's
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], I. Oppenheim
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
ABC software should be able to implement a
minimal amount of ABC in a well defined way that is
still standard compliant. The software developer is
then able to clearly indicate which ABC modules are
supported and which not.
Stuff
From: I. Oppenheim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I fundamentally disagree with this. I believe that
it is imperative that the standard and the software
that uses it should be isolated.
I agree with you. I had already a bit of argument about
this with
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, David Webber wrote:
I suspect that the only things the abc standard has
to worry about, as far as applications on different
platforms go, is to do with specification of text
fonts
The actual font type to be used is a typical issues for
the stylesheet meta standard.
and
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, David Webber wrote:
An application would have to parse the file it anyway to find out
what it uses. But all the application could do is put up a message
saying this abc file contains elements from abc module ... and so I
can't read all (any?) of it.
Applications that
Thinking about abc and applications:
1. Some apps are abc-oriented and deal only with that format.
2. Others like mine will consider it an extra.
For the writers of type 1 apps, having a committee defining the
standard may be frustrating - even if they're on the committee :-)
They'll need new
From: Bernard Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I read the (old) standard and thought that's OK. Not too much
work.
Hmm I must be telepathic - that's what *I* thought - before I came
here :-)
MOZART already has a general spec for an import filter for any
non-native format, and its MIDI import module is
From: I. Oppenheim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Applications that write ABC files, could indicate in
the ABC version field which ABC modules they used, e.g.
2MG for ABC version 2.0.0 with guitar module and
microtonality module.
Yes something like that might be useful - even if those writing abc
by
David Webber wrote:
appname:info;
would allow people to go beyond the standard in a way in which other
apps could ignore. (Or pick up.) The rule would simply have to be
that if such elements are omitted, the remaining music has to obey
the standard and make sense.
For this kind of in-line
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], David Webber
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Thinking about abc and applications:
1. Some apps are abc-oriented and deal only with that format.
2. Others like mine will consider it an extra.
For the writers of type 1 apps, having a committee defining the
standard may be
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, David Webber wrote:
The %%mozart: would indicate that this is information
for mozart only and the following stuff would be
interpreted by MOZART to say this is for an A4 page
with a five line stave 23 points high.
That's not a bad idea, but an ever better idea is to
I. Oppenheim wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, David Webber wrote:
I suspect that the only things the abc standard has
to worry about, as far as applications on different
platforms go, is to do with specification of text
fonts
The actual font type to be used is a typical issues for
the stylesheet
Bernard == Bernard Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bernard Maybe we need a register of accepted application names/codes.
There is one on the sourceforge ABC site. It seems to be down at the
moment, so I can't post an exact URL.
I want to echo some comments made by other members of the
Laura == Laura Conrad [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Laura There is one on the sourceforge ABC site. It seems to be
Laura down at the moment, so I can't post an exact URL.
It's back up:
From: Bert Van Vreckem [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For this kind of in-line stuff, maybe you could use the
established !!
notation: !appname:info!
Thanks to everyone who pointed this out.
I must admit to having been under the impression that the !..!
elements were supposed to be more or less standard
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 04:34:24PM +0200, Bert Van Vreckem wrote:
David Webber wrote:
appname:info;
would allow people to go beyond the standard in a way in which other
apps could ignore. (Or pick up.) The rule would simply have to be
that if such elements are omitted, the remaining
| David Webber wrote:
| appname:info;
|
| would allow people to go beyond the standard in a way in which other
| apps could ignore. (Or pick up.) The rule would simply have to be
| that if such elements are omitted, the remaining music has to obey
| the standard and make sense.
|
| For
Jon Freeman wrote,
I think you are taking a pretty narrow view here. Yes, abcm2ps is excellent
but it is pretty well useless to many people I know who may like to use abc.
What you see in the abcusers list tends to be the geeks, the ones that are
quite happy to run command line programs, are
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Laura Conrad wrote:
I do hope that the new effort won't completely ignore the work from
the old effort.
So where can we read the draft standard that you
prepared?
Irwin
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes
I. Oppenheim wrote:
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, David Webber wrote:
I suspect that the only things the abc standard has
to worry about, as far as applications on different
platforms go, is to do with specification of text
fonts
Jon Freeman wrote:
I think you are taking a pretty narrow view here. Yes, abcm2ps is
excellent but it is pretty well useless to many people I know who may like
to use abc.What you see in the abcusers list tends to be the geeks, the
ones that are
quite happy to run command line programs, are quite
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, John Chambers wrote:
An alternative, of course, is that we also have the
[...:...] notation. So in addition to things like
[K:Gm] and [K:clef=alto], we could say
[mozart:something].
I prefer to keep this [...] notation for inline header
fields, and to use !...! for inline
From: Gerry McCartney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What I should like to know, therefore, is where exactly is the
debate going
in terms of importance.
This is the important thing. :-)
I see four main desiderata as far as language goes (over and above
the 1.7.6 standard):
A way to include more than
From: Richard Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or, would an inline header [%%appname:info] do it ?
Again I thought that [ ] was for in-lining established commands lime
M: and K. So either [] or !! would do as long as there were a
legal way to define app-specific (or user-specific) info within
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Buddha Buck wrote:
For syntax (e.g., everything that isn't text, stick to stricty 7-bit
ASCII characters. No accents, no other funny stuff. Just straight
7-bit ASCII.
Agreed.
Bernard Hill wrote:
That's a strictly American view. There are 2
important characters on our
Wow this is the most active I've seen this list in months..
Toby
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Laura Conrad
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Bernard == Bernard Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bernard Maybe we need a register of accepted application names/codes.
There is one on the sourceforge ABC site. It seems to be down at the
moment, so I can't post an exact
On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 10:04:12AM -0700, Toby Rider wrote:
Wow this is the most active I've seen this list in months..
New blood, eh ?
--
Richard Robinson
The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes - S. Lem
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], I. Oppenheim
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Buddha Buck wrote:
For syntax (e.g., everything that isn't text, stick to stricty 7-bit
ASCII characters. No accents, no other funny stuff. Just straight
7-bit ASCII.
Agreed.
Bernard Hill wrote:
For the benefit of the newer members of this list, I'd like to give some
information about the way we got here.
Those that have been reading this list for a while will know that I
have a bee in my bonnet about the U: field, macros and the mess which
the abc 1.7 standard has created around them.
Dear ABC friends,
...And now for something completely different!
When abcm2ps creates its postscript output, it shades
the staff lines by adding tiny gray lines beneath the
black lines. This looks wonderful when you print the
output, but unfortunately it doesn't look as nice when
you convert the
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Phil Taylor wrote:
Of course you would need a separate static macro for every different
note with a roll on it, and Henrik Norbeck suggested an extension to
this
m: ~n3 = n{o}n{m}n
Phil, thank you for sharing this, this is a wonderful
idea! I strongly suggest to include
At least partly because the prospect of setting it up, installing
ghostscript to view graphics. etc. it just too daunting for them.
What these users (probably the majority of PC users) want is
something
that is easy to use and works on thier system
it's true I often recommended Abc to several
From: I. Oppenheim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'd love to try your program, but unfortunately I do
not have a Mac, and none of my friends have a Mac. So
that's a bit of a problem.
I'd guess you are on Linux and don't know what could work with that but,
with help from Phil Taylor, I did manage to get
I am using runabc.tcl (or runabc.exe) on both my PC and on Linux as a front end to abcm2psandgsview,and it is extremely easy to use. To a novice user, once it is setup, you hit "display" and it generates a pdf file directly and launches gsview32.exe (on Windows).
I think the biggest thing
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, [iso-8859-1] Forgeot Eric wrote:
Does someone know if it's possible to hack a
ghostscript version to have only the PDF export
That's possible. When compiling, you can select the
output devices you're interested in. But it won't make
ghostscript much smaller, because most of
Speaking of new blood, is there an accessible archive of abcusers
traffic that one can dig into for perspective (or lost postings that
one's junk-mail interceptor mis-characterizes)?
Dick Atlee
Richard Robinson wrote:
New blood, eh ?
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to:
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Dick Atlee wrote:
Speaking of new blood, is there an accessible archive of abcusers
traffic that one can dig into for perspective (or lost postings that
one's junk-mail interceptor mis-characterizes)?
http://www.mail-archive.com/abcusers%40argyll.wisemagic.com/
Groeten,
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Donald
White [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
I am using runabc.tcl (or runabc.exe) on both my PC and on Linux as a front end
to abcm2ps and gsview, and it is extremely easy to use. To a novice user, once
it is setup, you hit display and it generates a pdf file directly
I. Oppenheim wrote:
I think that the !...! format is also very useful, and
that we should keep it in the standard, in peaceful
coexistence with your macro facility.
I could probably live with the !...! format, although I don't like it*.
The real problem is the confusion between symbol
Jon Freeman wrote:
From: I. Oppenheim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'd love to try your program, but unfortunately I do
not have a Mac, and none of my friends have a Mac. So
that's a bit of a problem.
I'd guess you are on Linux and don't know what could work with that but,
with help from Phil Taylor, I
From: Bernard Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For graphical score editor (wysiwyg) and soon to support abc you
can try
Music Publisher (www.muspub.com) but if open source=free then No.
I have
a living to make.
open source means that you publish the source code for free for
people to edit as they will
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Phil Taylor wrote:
I. Oppenheim wrote:
I think that the !...! format is also very useful, and
that we should keep it in the standard, in peaceful
coexistence with your macro facility.
I could probably live with the !...! format, although I don't like it*
We know you
From: I. Oppenheim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Phil Taylor wrote:
I could probably live with the !...! format, although I don't
like it*
We know you don't like it, but there are others who do
like the !...! notation, including myself.
I know what Phil means. It doesn't sit
Is it possible to instruct (or modify) abcm2ps to
create pure black and white PS output (without gray
values) and to draw the staff lines as thin as
possible? This way the output would look much clearer
on the web.
as far as I know, abcm2ps creates pure bw output, but probably
your default
I. Oppenheim wrote:
|
| We know you don't like it, but there are others who do
| like the !...! notation, including myself. And since I
| like your macro facility as well, I propose to include
| both features in the upcomming ABC standard.
|
| Is that acceptable to you Phil? Do other people on
We need periodic reminders that abc was intended to be
readable by mere humans, and this is one of its strengths.
Hi List, Here is My 2 cents:
Readable ABC:
I've always been very happy that
tunes written in ABC can be played
or sung directly from source.
My usage:
I prefer ABC to MIDI for
HELP
This thing doesn't work, not that i'm mad at you guys
or anything, i just need to clear my box for the
summer.
everytime i try all i get is a message that say's it
failed. When i use the comands that come with that
message, i get a simullar message.
The same thing happens on
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Bert Van Vreckem wrote:
Good point. While Guido's abc manual deserves all the praise it gets, it
is rather Linux-centric. But Guido is a Linux man, so perhaps someone
else should write a section on how to set up abc under Windows. I use
sorry, but... my guide is
64 matches
Mail list logo
