How difficult would it be to create a simple script (perl/python/etc) that used regular expressions to standardize the gabc using whatever i j ae rules you like? This would be for after you download it from the database. That way the database is just that, and if people what i or j it's a simple automatic tool to make it look the way they want.
Tim On May 22, 2013, at 14:22, Olivier Berten <[email protected]> wrote: > We might want to ask ourself what's the aim of that database. I > thought of it as an editorial tool, not a musicological one. The final > aim is to help people making booklets. Therefore some consistency in > the orthography is useful. When you make a chant booklet, it would > make sense to have the same rules through the whole booklet. Having a > i or j won't make any difference in the way of singing or saying it. > That's why I currently consider it's the same piece if the music is > the same (including rhythmic signs) and the words are the same > (whatever orthography). > > Do you think this, for instance, should be split into 3 different > entries? http://test.selapa.net/gregobase/chant.php?id=2980 > > Olivier > > 2013/5/22 pierre <[email protected]>: >> Mmm, I am sorry to disagree with many of us. >> The gabc database should not be a standard of what is "good" gregorian >> score. >> It is not to "us" to decide if we must use i or j, or mass of PAul VI or >> older one. We should remain open. "We" are a tool. Only. >> It seems to me that the only possible way is to have a gabc database as near >> as possible of each original book. >> If there are many different versions of one hymn in different books, we must >> have the correspondant entries possible in the DB. >> The fact that the entry is filled is another question. It will be filled if >> someone fills it. But the DB should remain open. >> This could lead to a standard "de facto", if some entries are filled and >> other ones are not... >> But that should not be "by design". >> The reference to the original book seems enough to recognize various >> variants. >> And I see no problem if gabc data is more or less duplicated... >> >> Le 22/05/2013 16:58, Olivier Berten a écrit : >> >>> Well... I'm actually wondering myself... because I like to be as close >>> as possible as the source but it doesn't really make sense to me to >>> have different entries for the Graduale and the Liber versions. One >>> could argue that we should use some standardised latin (same with the >>> oe/ae/œ/æ or i/j question). >>> >>> But on the other hand the Liber gives a lot of information for people >>> less litterate in that topic which could be useful aswell: accents for >>> the people less used to the tonic accent placement in latin or noted >>> psalms for people less used to psalmody... >>> >>> I also wonder how to deal with the hymns with one different verse for >>> different occasions, or which are a port of another hymn... >>> >>> I'd love to have other peoples opinions >>> >>> 2013/5/22 Jacques Peron <[email protected]>: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I'd have a question about the rules to be followed on your database. >>> >>> There are differences between editions of gregorian chants : >>> - the Graduale puts accents on words only when they have 3 or more >>> syllabes, >>> while the Liber usualis and others put accents on all accented words ; >>> - liturgical books use i in place of j after 1962, but not before ; >>> - æ is often written ae, I think because they had no easy mean to do >>> otherwise (but I can't be affirmative). >>> >>> So here is my question : is it better to follow the presentation of the >>> source in every case (but some chants can be different between different >>> sources), or to follow uniform rules ? In such a case, would it be >>> possible >>> to give those rules, for example on the Participate page ? >>> >>> Please forgive me if I made English mistakes, >>> >>> Fr. Jacques Peron. >>> >>> >>> 2013/3/24 Olivier Berten <[email protected]> >>> Hi! >>> >>> Little by little, I'm getting further in my gregorian database system. >>> There is now an editing interface. It's not very user-friendly yet but >>> my knowledge in gui conception and programming is very weak... So if >>> you want to help, I'm very open to it! >>> >>> You can also just proofread the scores and check the little "Me" >>> button under "Proofread by" (if you don't see any mistakes, of >>> course). >>> >>> For those interested, I published the source code on GitHub >>> <https://github.com/olivierberten/GregoBase>. It's a mess... but if >>> you're very brave, you can have a look at it ;-) >>> >>> Olivier >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gregorio-users mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/gregorio-users >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gregorio-users mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/gregorio-users >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gregorio-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/gregorio-users > > _______________________________________________ > Gregorio-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/gregorio-users _______________________________________________ Gregorio-users mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/gregorio-users
