This is possible only if the gabc has all accents and "j" and "æ" but it wouldn't work the other way around without dictionary. And I don't know how it works with the œ/æ... Are all "œ" becoming "æ" in later orthography?
Olivier 2013/5/28 Brother Gabriel-Marie <[email protected]>: > Hmmm... since the site is coded in php, perhaps, when you choose the gabc > files you want, you could have a set of radio-button choices that could > apply a certain "style" to the files you download. php could just run a > check on the files and apply the stylistic changes. > > Then there would not be any need for duplicates, nor the worry of managing > them, nor the worry of the naming scheme. > > Just an idea. > > > On 5/22/2013 1:22 PM, Olivier Berten 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
