Jack Campin wrote: >> Secondly, it is MUCH easier for a staff-notation generator to suppress >> the drawing of P: fields in every voice other than V:1 than it would >> be for a player program to locate P: fields outside of the voice that >> it is currently parsing and then figure out which point in the >> current voice corresponds to that. > >Eh? You'd have something like > >P:Trio >V:1 x... >V:2 y... >V:3 z... > >and you've *already* parsed the P by the time you get to x, y, and z.
No. Let's say that your "Trio" label comes in the middle of the tune: V:1 a... V:2 b... V:3 c... P:Trio V:1 x... V:2 y... V:3 z... The parser will parse the whole of V:1, then the whole of V:2, and will not see the P: field until it's half way through V:3. Remember that the play parser operates on one voice at a time. >>> Then, how is a player supposed to take advantage of having P: within >>> the scope of V:? It isn't that way in the header, so if I *do* write >>> a piece where voice 1 has part order ABA and voice 2 has order CDCD, >>> how do I specify that order in the header P: line? If all the voices >>> are supposed to have the *same* order, why do I have the apparent >>> freedom to give each of them any order in the body, and how is this >>> constraint meant to be checked? >> Obviously you can't do that because all the voices share the same header. > >You could do it if you made the P header fields relative to voices, >as you've decided to do with P's in the tune body. The way you have >it at present is inconsistent. Current behaviour is absolutely consistent. In the tune all fields are voice-dependent, while in the header all fields (except V:) apply to all voices. What you are asking for is inconsistent, in that some in-tune fields will apply to only one voice while others apply to all. It might be possible to make part-order a sub-field of V: in the header as you suggest below, in which case it would be voice-dependent, but you would still have to put the in-tune P: fields in every voice. >One place this occurs for real is in pieces built over a ground bass. >I have seen several sets of these in the eighteenth century Scottish >repertoire, and they are all notated as if they had ABC like this: > > X:1 > T:thingy > M:something > V:1 P:ACDE > V:2 bass P:BBBB > K:G minor % really - that's the key for 9 out of 10 of these things > [V:1] [P:A] ... || > [V:2] [P:B] ... || > % > [V:1] [P:C] ... || > % > [V:1] [P:D] ... || > % > [V:1] [P:E] ... || > >that is, the ground is only written out once, under the melody of the >first section. BarFly currently forces the user to copy this out for >every variation, taking nearly twice as much paper as necessary. That's a different issue as we're now talking about display rather than playing. Phil Taylor To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
