It must be noted that if the database is dedicated to some specific
"style", those who do not agree with this style will have to develop
another DB.
We are to observe that there is currently no "official liturgical"
style, as style varies with each new Solesme book...
It is not sure that scripts can easily and automatically solve all
change of styles without manual check and correction.
So the goals could be :
- a database to welcome any gabc from any book with any style.
- a database allowing to develop various applications to help people
making booklets in various styles.
These goals do not seem to be contradictory.
Le 23/05/2013 08:07, Jacques Peron a écrit :
So I think we all agree : the question is the purpose of the database :
1. if it is a single /gabc repository/, there's no need to standardize
anything : everyone would have to adapt the files to his needs,
possibly with scripts...
2. if the final aim is to help people making booklets :
a. either we want a single interface, without having the user to
wonder which style he has to choose ; then it's necessary to impose a
standard style (that should be, IMHO, as close as possible to official
liturgical books
<http://www.ccwatershed.org/pdfs/7681-abolition-letter-j/download/>) ;
server-side scripts could help converting other styles to this standard ;
b. or we want more flexibility ; then it's necessary (because I
don't think server-side scripts would really cover all cases) to
duplicate files and to easily see how each one was typed, either in
the name, or by adding a property to the file.
I don't want to make a decision nor impose personal choices ; but I'd
like to know which decision will be made, to avoid subsequent waste of
time.
2013/5/22 Pierre François <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
I, Father Pierre François, share the opinion of the other Pierre,
Pierre Couderc.
Moreover I think it is very hard to achieve a standard notation,
because of the evolution of the matter, which we do not control.
There will be necessarely some duplication of partitions: v.gr
<http://v.gr>. even the /Kyrie/ is not the same in the /novus
ordo/ and the /forma extraordinaria/. In the first one,
repetitions are indicated with "bis", in the latter with "iij" or
"ij", and there are many cases like this. For getting continuity
in the booklets, I think you just have to remain inside of the
form of the rite you choose: FO, FE or whatever, and that
consistently through whole your booklet.
Fr. Pierre
On 05/22/2013 07:45 PM, pierre wrote:
Mmm, I am sorry to disagree with many of us.
The gabc database should not be a standard of what is "good"
gregorian score.
It is not to "us" to decide if we must use i or j, or mass of
PAul VI or older one. We should remain open. "We" are a tool. Only.
It seems to me that the only possible way is to have a gabc
database as near as possible of each original book.
If there are many different versions of one hymn in different
books, we must have the correspondant entries possible in the DB.
The fact that the entry is filled is another question. It will be
filled if someone fills it. But the DB should remain open.
This could lead to a standard "de facto", if some entries are
filled and other ones are not...
But that should not be "by design".
The reference to the original book seems enough to recognize
various variants.
And I see no problem if gabc data is more or less duplicated...
Le 22/05/2013 16:58, Olivier Berten a écrit :
Well... I'm actually wondering myself... because I like to be as
close
as possible as the source but it doesn't really make sense to me to
have different entries for the Graduale and the Liber versions. One
could argue that we should use some standardised latin (same
with the
oe/ae/oe/æ or i/j question).
But on the other hand the Liber gives a lot of information for
people
less litterate in that topic which could be useful aswell:
accents for
the people less used to the tonic accent placement in latin or
noted
psalms for people less used to psalmody...
I also wonder how to deal with the hymns with one different
verse for
different occasions, or which are a port of another hymn...
I'd love to have other peoples opinions
2013/5/22 Jacques Peron <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>:
Hello,
I'd have a question about the rules to be followed on your
database.
There are differences between editions of gregorian chants :
- the Graduale puts accents on words only when they have 3 or
more syllabes,
while the Liber usualis and others put accents on all accented
words ;
- liturgical books use i in place of j after 1962, but not before ;
- æ is often written ae, I think because they had no easy mean
to do
otherwise (but I can't be affirmative).
So here is my question : is it better to follow the presentation
of the
source in every case (but some chants can be different between
different
sources), or to follow uniform rules ? In such a case, would it
be possible
to give those rules, for example on the Participate page ?
Please forgive me if I made English mistakes,
Fr. Jacques Peron.
--
Father Pierre FRANÇOIS (http://www.romanliturgy.org)
Bosmanslei 16
B-2018 Antwerpen (Belgium)
mobile: +32 474 719 131 <tel:%2B32%20474%20719%20131>
phone: +32 3 237 63 96 <tel:%2B32%203%20237%2063%2096>
_______________________________________________
Gregorio-users mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/gregorio-users
_______________________________________________
Gregorio-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/gregorio-users
_______________________________________________
Gregorio-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/gregorio-users
