David Stone a écrit : > hmmm. You mean, I assume, allowing multiple occurrences of the > `manuscript' and closely related fields. > > On the whole that seems too much for the gabc header; I think the gabc > header should be kept fairly simple. Classifying chant precisely and > relating different sources is something which (I believe) chant > scholars find hard work. (Certainly I get that impression from > e.g. David Hiley's book.) I suspect that if such a scholar (and I'm > not one) wanted to use gabc, they'd just put their own single > reference in the header, and use a database or table, in a separate > document, to show what they believe the relationships between > different sources are. >
It seems reasonable... there is only one thing that I'm still waiting for, about the licenses. There can be a different license (and copyright) for these three different things: * the melody * the transcription in square notation * the gabc file The only doubt I have is that I'm not sure the second and third can be different (but I think they can). Do you think we should have a license field for all these things? I personally think so... -- Elie _______________________________________________ Gregorio-devel mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/gregorio-devel
