On 22.03.2007 David W. Fenton wrote:
The point of measure numbers it to allow conductors and scholars to
> unambiguously refer to a particular measure without fear of being
> misunderstood. That being the case, measures in first and second
> endings *must* be numbered differently, one way or another.
Do you consider "1st ending measure 16" and "2nd ending measure 16"
to be "one way or another" that they are numberd differently? If not,
I'd like to know why. If so, then you don't have a beef with
Johannes.
In fact I expect the confusion greater if you number them seperately and
say "measure 17". Undoubtedly several orchestra members, at least on
this side of the globe, will ask "Is that the second ending?", and that
last viola player (sorry folks) will still start after the double bar.
Johannes
--
http://www.musikmanufaktur.com
http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
