Re: [abcusers] small nag in ABC notation?

2002-01-22 Thread Phil Taylor
Guido Gonzato wrote: On Tue, 22 Jan 2002, Phil Taylor wrote: I would regard CC/ as an illegal construct since only makes sense when both sides have the same length. Maybe this is the problem ? I'm inclined to agree. It's not explicitly illegal in the abc standard, but it's a bit ambiguous

[abcusers] small nag in ABC notation?

2002-01-21 Thread Funzionario E.D.
hello, this snippet produces a dotted quarter note followed by two joined semi-quavers. Measure 1 does it using quavers as standard note, while measure 2 uses quarter notes: X: 1 M: 4/4 L: 1/8 K: C % C3C/D/E2| [L:1/4] CC/D//E| It converts fine with abcm2ps and BarFly, but no other abc

Re: [abcusers] small nag in ABC notation?

2002-01-21 Thread Wil Macaulay
The following variation works in Skink - the inline [L:x/x] is not yet implemented. It's on the list! I've got [M: ] and [K:] so far. Note that as written, the example does not have a T: line, which is required by the 1.6 standard, and has leading space for the M, L and K which are supposed to

Re: [abcusers] small nag in ABC notation?

2002-01-21 Thread Taral
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 04:49:36PM +0100, Funzionario E.D. wrote: C3C/D/E2| [L:1/4] CC/D//E| The second measure here translates to [L:1/4]C5//C//D//E. Is that what you wanted? -- Taral [EMAIL PROTECTED] This message is digitally signed. Please PGP encrypt mail to me. Any technology, no matter