> > Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 21:06:28 +0100 > > From: Bernard Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > writes > > >Bernard Hill wrote- > > > > > > >Surely by the standard > > > >(www.gre.ac.uk/~c.walshaw/abc/abc-draft.txt) H *is* predefined > > > >as fermata. > > > > > >But that's not the standard. That's the draft of the elusive next > > >standard. > > > > I was advised by Chris Walshaw himself that that is the current standard > > and has replaced the one on the standard web site.
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 22:08:59 EDT > Cool. Thanks. First I'd heard. No mention of it on Chris's web > site (still refers to it as draft and 1.6 as current). > > Does everyone know about this? My subscription to the list was > broken for a couple of months earlier this spring, so I might > have missed it. I've been on the list continuously during that time, and I certainly didn't know that there was any official proclamation (whatever that means) of the 1.7.6 standard becoming current. Certainly http://www.gre.ac.uk/~c.walshaw/abc/#standard currently refers to 1.6 as the standard and the 1.7.6 document as a draft. However, several developers have been coding to the 1.7.6 draft for quite some time. (In fact, discussion on this list suggests to me that a majority of developers appear to have either implemented many of the elements in the 1.7.6 draft standard, or at least have been careful to avoid violating it wherever possible.) Given that, it would seem reasonable to me to treat the 1.7.6 document as if it were the current de facto standard. Jeff To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
