It seems to me like extensibility is abc's Achilles' heel.  Ten years ago
it made sense to be vague -- nobody really knew how it would be used.
It was more of a "suggestion" than a standard.  We have enough
experience now to create a real standard for folk music, which is what Abc
was intended for in the first place.

If we define Abc 2.0 as a rigid and non-extensible format, there's still
AbcPlus, which should keep that name (or Abc+).  You'd use Abc as an
interchange format and Abc+ as a composer's and arranger's tool.

I've been working on an Abc 2.0 proposal, which is a stripped-down version
of 1.6.  Amongst other things, I removed most of the headers (notably
A-G, X and Z, to avoid confusion with notes and rests).  I admit
it's a little radical :)   http://bespin.org/~tom/abc2-tcn.txt

Tom Novelli

P.S.  I'm working on an Abc viewer for Linux/svgalib.. it could be adapted
to Windows as a replacement for Abc2win - then there'd be no excuses :)
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html

Reply via email to