Anselm Lingnau wrote:
Laurie Griffiths [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's your turn to say what you find unacceptable in the proposal put forward
by me and Simon (the two were pretty much identical).
As far as I'm concerned, the main problem with these proposals is that
the syntax they
Ah. Good. Nicely put. I have a lot of sympathy with this.
(So you now all realise that I have a lot of sympathy with *both* sides).
The problem is that we want something that is completely compatible with
everything that has gone before and that can be enhanced into the future
with minimal
Having watched this debate for a while, I feel obliged to make a
comment. I think what is actually wanted is the ability to write
Q:allegro
because the word allegro was the tempo indicator in the original
score. If a player program recognizes this and picks an appropriate
tempo, then all is
Hello,
Anselm Lingnau wrote:
I define `ad-hoc stuff' to be syntax that is used in one particular
header field, such as `if there is a `-' after the metronome speed in a
`Q:' field that means that the metronome speed is not supposed to be
printed'. Why don't we allow a `-' after a composer
Buddha Buck wrote:
I have a file called playford.abc, which I got from
http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~flip/contrib/dance/playford.abc.
Unfortunately, it doesn't have any information on who transcribed it, or
who owns the copyright, etc.
Does anyone have any idea who wrote it?
As
On Tue, 13 Nov 2001, Laurie Griffiths wrote:
I'm not 100% sure what the right default is in the absence of a
beat=. Is it the L value (explicit or implied)?
I'd rather stay away from L:. A quick look through some of my collection
shows that it would give the wrong beat more often than not.
I defintely don't want to have to write a Highland
pipe jig (typical grace = 1/32) like:
L:1/8
K:HP
{g//}A{d//}A{e//}A {g//e//f//}e2 f | {g//}ec{G//}c {g//e//f//}e2
How about
L:1/8 grace=1/32
K:HP
{g}A{d}A{e}A {gef}e2 f | {g}ec{G}c {gef}e2
Why the quotes?
I'd prefer
L:1/8
Hello Anselm,
Now we surely brought it to the point what divides us deeply.
For reasons of scientific quality I need to include as much as possible
information of the original source within the file, as near to the
original as possible. So the file should be a representation of the
playback
James Allwright [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Since Playford published his collections of music several centuries ago,
you are pretty safe in assuming the copyright has expired.
Yes, but it might be construed that there is copyright on editorial
changes within the transcription, which may be more
At 05:11 PM 11-14-2001 +0100, Bert Van Vreckem wrote:
I found a site of a Michael Robinson that's into traditional music, but
the Playford transcription isn't mentioned:
http://www.sirius.com/~ststones/. There's other abc stuff there, though.
Actually, he has, buried in his Standing Stones
I sense that we are all beginning to understand the virtues and weakneses of
each proposal. I sense that any residual NIH is weakening. Good. I'm
going to lurk and think for a bit!
L.
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Is there any mileage in something like
Q:Allegro=120 % definition
...
Q:3/8=Allegro % use, meaning that the beat is 3/8 in this case
?
Laurie
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Simon Wascher [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
For reasons of scientific quality I need to include as much as possible
information of the original source within the file, as near to the
original as possible. So the file should be a representation of the
playback *and* the the display.
The ABC
13 matches
Mail list logo
