Tracy Llenos a écrit : > On Jan 15, 2009, at 10:06 AM, David Stone wrote: > >> Here is an updated version of my previous suggestion. I have taken up >> Elie's comments, and added `meter' for the Caecilia project. >> >> I have marked the type of change to each (compared to gregorio 0.9.2): >> [-] remove this field; [+] new field ; [=] no real change, just >> clarification; [!=] changed meaning of field. >> >> translator [=] >> >> The name of the transcriber into gabc. >> >> translation-date [=] >> >> The date the gabc was written. >> > > Sorry for entering this discussion so late; I think everything as > you've written (with Elie's following clarifications) is good, except > for these fields. Can we consider possibly renaming them? If I (well, > a random user) were reading the header of a gabc file, and saw these > two fields, I'd think they referred to a -vernacular- translation -- > which, of course, might not even be in the given gabc file. Maybe > transcriber/transcription-date, or even gabc-translator/date, to make > it clear it refers to the translation to gabc notation, and not a > translation of the chant text into another language? >
I agree with this, transcription is less confusing than translation. I've seen another problem: to be as precise as possible, most pieces come from several manuscripts (and maybe several books) so there should be a possibility to indicate it. But I must admit I don't really know how... maybe something like: manuscript[0].name = first title; manuscript[0].piece-reference = reference; etc. would do the trick... what do you think? -- Elie _______________________________________________ Gregorio-devel mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/gregorio-devel
