Re: [abcusers] On parsers again - Outlook PHP

2004-08-19 Thread David Webber
From: Bernard Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] The expensive electrical card punches (the size of a desk) printed the ascii equivalent across the top of the card at the same time as printing it. Or more likely the EBCDIC equivalent if you used IBM machines. :-) Ah, the good old days... Ah yes, the

Re: [abcusers] K:none

2004-08-19 Thread Steven Bennett
K:none is already defined in the ABC 2.0 draft spec, although there's a slight ambiguity in that spec, since none is also shorthand for clef=none. When I implemented that section of my parser, I resolved that in favor of the key, and required the full clef=none if you want no clef. K: by itself

Re: [abcusers] On parsers again - Outlook PHP

2004-08-19 Thread robert fallis
On Thursday 19 August 2004 11:53, David Webber wrote: From: Bernard Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] The expensive electrical card punches (the size of a desk) printed the ascii equivalent across the top of the card at the same time as printing it. Or more likely the EBCDIC equivalent if you

Re: [abcusers] K:none

2004-08-19 Thread Phil Taylor
On 19 Aug 2004, at 16:37, Steven Bennett wrote: K: by itself is not documented in ANY version of the ABC spec as a valid sequence, and cannot be assumed to work in any program. In my own parser, again, that would cause an error on the field, which would cause the field to be ignored (in an

Re: [abcusers] K:none

2004-08-19 Thread John Chambers
Steven Bennett writes: | K:none is already defined in the ABC 2.0 draft spec, although there's a | slight ambiguity in that spec, since none is also shorthand for | clef=none. When I implemented that section of my parser, I resolved that | in favor of the key, and required the full clef=none if

Re: [abcusers] K:none

2004-08-19 Thread Steven Bennett
John Chambers wrote: Steven Bennett writes: | K:none is already defined in the ABC 2.0 draft spec, although there's a | slight ambiguity in that spec, since none is also shorthand for | clef=none. When I implemented that section of my parser, I resolved that | in favor of the key, and

Re: [abcusers] K:none

2004-08-19 Thread John Chambers
Steven Bennett wrote: | I believe I decided that T: was a valid title field as well -- some pieces | simply don't have a title. Yes; I have a number of examples where I don't want a title. Mostly they're musical fragments, or things like a blank manuscript page. OTOH, one thing my Tune Finder

Re: [abcusers] K:none

2004-08-19 Thread John Walsh
| I believe I decided that T: was a valid title field as well --some |pieces simply don't have a title. Yes; I have a number of examples where I don't want a title. Mostly they're musical fragments, or things like a blank manuscript page. None none and Gan Ainm are legal titles, (And not