Wendy wrote - >It would have been great if the original standard had had separate >fields for key signature and tonic, so that the tonic could be specified >by itself and the key signature expressed in pure sharps and flats, like >the extension in John Chambers' jcabc2ps allows. It would have been more >flexible in allowing users to insert the information needed - and to >leave out that which is *not* needed - by their respective traditions. >But I think Bryan is right about it being too late; there is no way to >change it now without breaking a large number of abc tunes already in >circulation.
Thank you Wendy. It has taken about two years but that is as neat a summary of what I've been trying to say (in the face of considerable opposition) as I could hope for. It was already too late to change when I first mentioned it. I was only using it as an example of how things could go wrong if developers felt free to intoduce their own innovations without thinking through the consequences or discussing them with the rest of the abc community first. Once something has gone into use, you can't get rid of it. In this case, the situation could be improved a little by the general adoption of John Chambers' explicit key proposal. Bryan Creer To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
