On Thu 22 Nov 2001 at 12:22AM +0000, Jack Campin wrote: > > That says exactly nothing about the semantics. > > Unless your "q:" field provides me with a way of DEFINING those strings > in a musically intuitive way so that a numerical playback speed can be > statically deduced from the musical text (e.g. by a playback program), > there is no point in what you're suggesting. There are already about > 10 different ways to put uninterpreted text into a tune header, we *do > not* need another one. >
The problem I have with the "definition" idea is that definitions are only useful if you re-use the definition. If a term is defined at the beginning of a tune, used once and then lost there is no point in having it. This seems to be how written tempos are normally used. It seems we haven't even agreed what the problem is. I think it will be difficult to agree on a solution. James Allwright To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
