John Chambers a skrivas:
> Bob wrote:
> | At 12:10 PM 02-01-01 +0100, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
> | >$ Starting a new part (P:) or giving a subtitle (T:) silently imply
> | >$ switching to the first voice.
> |
> | Is the automatic switching to the first voice desirable / necessary? It
> | seems to me it would be confusing, particularly if someone had notated some
> | multi voice music without part indications and then tried adding them later.
>
> This strikes me as not a good idea at all. It is based on the
> assumption that transcribers will always want to intermingle voices
> in the abc. But we've already had some software that requires writing
> each part as a separate block of code, and in some situations, this
> is a very reasonable way to write it. This would give abc of the
> form:
>
> V:1
> P:A
> (music)
> P:B
> (music)
> V:2
> P:A
> (music)
> P:B
> (music)
>
> With the above rule, the result of this would be totally incorrect,
> and probably baffling to the user. It would result in the notes for
> V:1 being shown for both voices. The only fix would be a total reorg
> of the music. This would effectively outlaw music in the above form.
As there is no standard yet for the V: field, is it a problem?
Now, I think that such writing is not easy to read...
> I'd think it would be better if V: and P: didn't interact at all.
When writing the draft, I had the idea that some voice could be silent
for some time. Look at 'voices.abc' in abc2ps-1.3.0: the first tune
(Fairfield Fancy) has 2 parts which first one has only one voice.
Here is an other virtual example:
P:Intro % piano
V:RH
..
V:LH
..
P:Melody1 % voice and piano
V:song
..
V:RH
..
V:LH
..
P:Chorus % voice only
V:song
..
P:Melody2 % voice, piano and flute
V:song
..
V:flute
..
V:RH
..
V:LH
..
--
Ken ar c'henta� | ** Breizh ha Linux atav! **
| http://moinejf.free.fr/
P�p� Jef | please, on reply, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
