I was thinking about it as it's easy for i/j but I think for oe/ae/œ/æ
there are some cases where they are not interchangeable, which means
we should work with a dictionary. It's not impossible but it's much
more complex.

Olivier

2013/5/22 Timothy Fitzgerald <[email protected]>:
> 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

_______________________________________________
Gregorio-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/gregorio-users

Reply via email to