----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack Campin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2004 5:17 PM Subject: Re: [abcusers] ABC and MusicXML
> Most people want GIFs. But if they're going to do it on their own > machines, rather than via the TuneFinder interface, the ABC better > be straightforward and easily editable, since the usual reason for > wanting a different score than the way it comes off the Web is if > you want to change the notes themselves in some way. OK, for the sake or argument, how about pdf? We try to make a png available (instead of the gif) as a draft and try to produce the other for "quality print output". An example, probably given before here is: http://www.folkinfo.org/abctest/getpdf.php?SongID=2&paper=a4 > > If there were abc2MusicXML and MusicXML2abc converters, would it > > possible to produce abc that always conformed to the same set of > > abc "rules"? > > It would be, but it would throw away many of the distinctive things > ABC can express. For eample, look at the pibroch example in my modes > tutorial. I put the canntaireachd form of the music at the right > margin as an ABC comment (it would be messy to include it as if it > were a song text). Unless your ABC -> XML translator retained the > original ABC source, there'd be no way to recover that information > after a round-trip translation. What I've done there is perfectly > standard and works in any reasonable ABC implementation, but it's > not invariant under translation to anything else whatever. The inability to recover that information would be what I want but, yes, I do see it is important that abc can be entered and used in other ways. > > One problem I have that has been commented on by Jack Campin for > > one is that our abc is not always as clear to read as it could be. > > I agree with that but on the otherhand, on a site stuggling to get > > any contributers, the last thing I want to do is stipulate rules > > as to how the abc should be written (especially given our main aims > > above - that it works on abcm2ps and abc2midi is the priority... > > but it would be nice to improve in our abc for those who want to > > read it) or even what software should be used (e.g. our main > > contributer uses Harmony Assistant) as the tougher I make it, the > > fewer will be willing to try. > > The answer to that one is a human editor. How much is there on your > site? Maybe I could help if it isn't going to mean hours of connect > time link-hopping. Feel free to take a look. I've been promising to sort out long line abcs for ages for example but never got round to it mainly as I know how long it would take me... Everything as entered in abc form can be found at: http://www.folkinfo.org/songs/allabc.asp It's only a few 100K and < 500 songs. You may need to change the file type or an extension on the download to get it to save or view. > Only given a *very* sophisticated translator. Why use ABC as an > intermediate format if you aren't using its distinctive advantages? > As a base for computer-translation-to-anything, XML is surely going > to outdo ABC as its toolbase grows. ABC only wins out when you need > to tinker with the music yourself, and that needs readability. The distinctive advantages to me are that it is very easy to store and makes for a small compact file and that quality and reliable command line tools such as abcm2ps I can run on the fly from the website (as well of course as other good abc programs) exist. Maybe one day perhaps a move to XML would make sense for me, but not yet and when I started, I was quite keen to get out of the dt/mudcat songwright/midi to hold songs thinking. One thing I will openly confess to is that I hadn't realised how much there was to abc and the visual aspects. Also, whatever we become (assuming we last as a site), I'd like to think we can at least supply abc in a "visual user friendly" format in time. Jon To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
