Dear Aaron,
My one worry with using the standard GABC notation for beneventan neumes
is there isn't a one-to-one mapping between note position and neume
shape, the way there is with square notation, for example with the three
notes of the Climacus, or the different shapes for a single note
This is something I didn't think about... maybe there could be an
extension to gabc to remove ambiguous notations?
Reading Paléographie Musicale XV, I realize the difficulty of adding the
Beneventan notation: according to manuscripts, the glyphs are totally
different, and each manuscript style would require its own font!
Here is a proposal, if you agree with it, I'll update
http://gregoriochant.org/dokuwiki/doku.php/gregowiki:language accordingly:
When specifying a glyph, one could specify the different ambitus with
the notation
am:zzz where zzz would be the corresponding gabc. For example a clivis
with an ambitus of three would be
clam:gd
the am:zzz notation would be at the end of the description of the glyph
(the description can contain all the other elements), it will have a
default value and won't be mandatory.
Also, this is not related, but I think 'vihgsufsue' is confusing, what
about making the syntax more verbose, like vi;h:g;su:f;su:g; ?
What do you think?
Thank you,
--
Elie
_______________________________________________
Gregorio-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/gregorio-users
