Re: [abcusers] RE: ABC transcrivers ID
Hello, Richard Robinson wrote: (...) I dunno. Personally, since I need such a numbering scheme, I'm using a %%ID: line, on the grounds that it won't conflict with any accepted usages; and when I get that sorted out and it reaches my web-collection I'll use another such '%%' line for the 'base' collection, or maybe (probably) to form a URL. Such a scheme will never be more than one person's particular addition unless the writers of the software in use choose to incorporate it. Even then there's always the John Chambers Case - people who read ABC directly and can't even be bothered to include an X: line :- but we can't do anything about that :) I think its quite clear that it is impossible to enforce whatever numbering scheme to all abc format users, so the only question is if we can find a solution that is based on an agreement of a large number of abc collection owners (and programmers) an so reasonable and open that others join it because they find the agreement sensible. It could be something like the identification system in librarys, probably made up the same way (are there librarians out there ?). And the main problem will still not be solved, that nobody can stop people from stripping off all this usefull information when copying the source. Besides this there is a big problem with altered files in general: If I change the apperance of the abc text - like I do it regulary - whose file is it then, if I correct or alter the abc text - the music - what happens then ? Again we could - and should - make up a code of conduct for this cases but there is no way of enforcing this, just the personal decision to follow the rules for the sake of a better world ;-) . An unique ID has to be long: if there are collections which include large sources (1001 tunes... or many tunes of the same kind, one needs at least four digits to to idenify them within the file or collection, and if there are more sources or kinds of tunes, at least three digits for identifying them (better more). If we use letters and numbers for identfying the place, person or collection three digits for this purpose will not be enough if we do not want people to use names like 7QX. So, at shortest a ID has to allow at least eleven digits and, if we want to make these ID's to give further information (person, collection, area ...), eleven will surely not be enough. I opt against Zip codes or geographical names in an ID as they lose their meaning in the same way that URL's do when the person moves. To avoid double use there has to be a record of ID's which are in use or had been used in the past (also this record could contain information about the author like suporting the actuall URL; this record must be at a save place in the net, available for a long period of time). So, I find this idea interesting, but I think this must be discussed and planned in long terms. regards, Simon Wascher - Vienna, Austria Example thats what I got: X:1 T:Valse à Delsay R:valse S:Culture Populaire et Loisirs, Poitou M:3/4 L:1/8 K:G D2 |GDB,DGD|BDB,DGD|B2 ADFA|G2 B2 D2 | GDB,DGD|BDB,DGD|B2 ADFA|1 G4 :|2 G3 |: DGB|d2 dedc|B2 GDGD|c2 ADAD|B2 GDGB| d2 dedc|B2 GDGD|c2 ADAD|1 G3:|2 G4 || thats what I made up for me, and passed on for playing purposes: X:2 T:Valse à Delsay (adaptiert fuer sack-pfeife) R:valse S:Culture Populaire et Loisirs, PoitouZ Z:original abc transcription by Stephan Steiner N:adaptiert by Simon Wascher M:3/4 L:1/8 K:G D2 |\ BGDGBG | dGDGBG | d2 cFAc | B2 d2 D2 |\ BGDGBG | dGDGBG | d2 cFAc |1 B4 :|\ [2 B3 || |: DGB |\ d2 dedc | B2 GDGD | c2 ADAD | B2 GDGB | d2 dedc | B2 GDGD | c2 ADAD |1 G3:|\ [2 G4 || To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] RE: ABC transcrivers ID
Simon Wascher [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think its quite clear that it is impossible to enforce whatever numbering scheme to all abc format users, so the only question is if we can find a solution that is based on an agreement of a large number of abc collection owners (and programmers) an so reasonable and open that others join it because they find the agreement sensible. Yes. It could be something like the identification system in librarys, probably made up the same way (are there librarians out there ?). I think the `tune/transcription ID' should be similar in spirit philosophically to the `message ID' found on e-mail messages and Usenet postings. That is, it shouldn't a priori try to `classify' the tune according to some set of criteria (which we will never be able to get a consensus on), but be merely a globally unique identifier. My view would be that the most sensible approach for this would be using URNs (or Uniform Resource Names), which are basically like WWW-style URLs but don't specify *where* a certain resource is to be found. For example, we could agree on a syntax like urn:abc-id:collection:collection-dependent-part like, for example, urn:abc-id:skye-coll:miller_of_drone There would have to be a registry for collections to ensure that the collection names remain globally unique; of course a collection would not have to refer to an actual published volume of tunes, but we could have urn:abc-id:campin:... and so on, where each owner of a collection would be free to make up their collection-dependent-parts (within the confines of URN syntax). This could of course contain an informal classification. The nice thing about this approach is that as URN usage becomes more widespread there could be a `resolving service' accessible to WWW browsers and such that would map abc-id URNs to actual URLs where the resource (i.e., tune) could be found. Of course use of this would not be mandatory; indeed it would not be mandatory for tunes to be actually available on-line. If this idea catches on we should try and get a URN namespace registered with the IANA. And the main problem will still not be solved, that nobody can stop people from stripping off all this usefull information when copying the source. Besides this there is a big problem with altered files in general: If I change the apperance of the abc text - like I do it regulary - whose file is it then, if I correct or alter the abc text - the music - what happens then ? This is difficult to get right. There could be various transformations of an ABC text that would change the bytes of the text but would leave the musical contents as well as the `meta-data' (the title, composer and so on) unchanged. In my opinion, if somebody assigns an URN to a piece of ABC text that means that he or she `signed off' on it as it stands, and that it should be passed on either verbatim or without that URN. If a piece of ABC text is changed then the URN of the `original' could be preserved in a header line. Anselm -- Anselm Lingnau .. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dost thou love life? Then do not squander time; for that's the stuff life is made of. -- Benjamin Franklin To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Susato's Danseryes
Just like to tell everybody at abcusers that I've just posted a complete ABC edition of Tielman Susato's Danserye at http://www.musicaviva.com/abc/tunes/susato-tielman/susato-1551.abc As usual this is a temporary, abcusers only URL - valid until I've had time to add the music to the main body of the Musica Viva collection. (*That* might take quite a while.) Danserye is a collection of 59 or so (it's often hard to tell when one piece ends and the next begins) dance tunes in four part settings, published by Tielman Susato in Atwerpen 1551. It's probably the best known source for renaissance dance music today. My transcriptions raises a few interesting questions regarding ABC-versions of early music. Should we add barlines? How do we disern between original and editorial accidentals? etc. etc. etc. Anybody's views on those question are much apreciated. So are any error reprots, of course. Frank Nordberg To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
