Hello,
there is no reason to reject ::| and :::| notation as far as I see.
Additive complementary constructs (intriguing to me) could be:
:text|
and
:numeral|
the text construct would allow to specify freely any text that gives
information on the number of repeats.
examples:
:repeat this
I've been off sailing. Let me try (below) to clear up the tempo thread for
the last week.
Do we have a concensus? Can we adopt this yet?
Laurie
Jack Campin:
One extra thing you get in actual scores: multiple names for the same tempo,
which in your notation might be
Q:allegro=Tempo I
Hello,
John Chambers wrote:
(...)
[First and second repeats]
After several online discussions, I (and probably a few others) have
implemented the rather trivial extension of allowing any string of
digits, commas, hyphens and periods to label an ending. This means
that endings like
If 1+3 means the same as 1,3 then I would NOT like to see it.
Multiple different ways to write the same thing just makes things more
complicated. I presume that 1-3 means the same as 1,2,3. I can live with
that as it could save a lot of typing;1-6 is much shorter than 1,2,3,4,5,6.
Laurie
-
Simon Wascher [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hello,
there is no reason to reject ::| and :::| notation as far as I see.
Additive complementary constructs (intriguing to me) could be:
:text|
and
:numeral|
assume rest of proposal is included by reference
I second this proposal. I have a
Simon Wascher writes:
| I would like to add:
| [1+3
| and
| [13
This is easy; it adds a couple of chars to the list of acceptable
chars in the ending string. As long as these chars can't start
another ABC term, there's no ambiguity. My current implementation has
-,.0123456789 as the
there is no reason to reject ::| and :::| notation as far as I see.
You go on to suggest a more powerful formalism, so one reason would be
that we simply don't need it.
[Simon's message rearranged...]
Additive complementary constructs (intriguing to me) could be:
:numeral|
This looks
They are absolute. Thus, no matter what key you are in, _e means E flat.
- Eric
-Original Message-
From: Erik Ronström [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
What the accidentals =, ^, _ mean? Are they absolute (e g _e means
e flat) or are they in relation to the key (e g =e means e flat
Jack Campin wrote:
In music I've seen that uses this construct, it's represented by
printing (3x) above the staff. A staff-notation generator could
do whatever it liked with |:: ... ::|, but I suspect that most
non-Scandiwegian users would be happier with some such explicit
I feel these suggestions are making it complicated. I would like to follow
the engineering maxim of Keep It Simple (yes, I know there's normally
another S on the end and I know what it stands for but I don't want to
insult anyone).
- Original Message -
From: Buddha Buck [EMAIL
10 matches
Mail list logo
