Re: [abcusers] Modes, democracy and benevolent(?) dictatorship
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of course, this does run contrary to the other common approach, which might be summarized "If the ABC has even a tiny error, you should reject it, lest people be encouraged to keep making errors." The consequence of this is to support a »loose mode« as well as a »picky mode«. You use loose mode for stuff that comes in from elsewhere that doesn't pass in picky mode, and picky mode for stuff that you are going to send out that you want to be 100% conforming to the standard (or whatever). Anselm -- Anselm Lingnau . [EMAIL PROTECTED] Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. -- P. J. O'Rourke To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Modes, democracy and benevolent(?) dictatorship
Laurie wrote: I suspect that a greater problem lies in the finer detail. For instance (not saying BF, Muse or any particular package does or does not accept any of these things, they are just to give a feel) snip I think BarFly will reject all of those, except for the long title, where it will simply ignore the second line. Phil Taylor To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Modes, democracy and benevolent(?) dictatorship
Laurie Griffiths wrote: Right - programs should accept the widest choice but generate standard ABC. BUT Think about Barfly. It doesn't generate at all. That's true in a sense, since BarFly is a text editor, and accepts any text you type into it and saves it without qualms. If it accepts mangled syntax then it encourages and legitimises such mangling If it refuses to, then it is "broken" - so it needs careful thought. And any other "input only" ABC program (e.g. one that just converts to tadpoles, or one that just plays) it has the same characteristic. I don't know what the answer is. I think the answer here lies in a graded response: BarFly offers several levels of error checking. It won't recognise abc tunes within the text unless they conform in a basic way - start with an X: field and contain a K: field followed by at least one line of music. In order to play a tune a whole lot of other features are required, and to display it as music a separate but similar set. Finally, there is an error checking mode which does things like making sure the bars all add up and catching minor infringements of syntax which don't prevent the tune from playing otherwise. With error checking off, it will play almost any abc you find on the net. Many of these tunes will display errors when you try to display them as music, and many more will fail the error checking mode. Users are advised to do all checks on tunes which they intend to upload. Phil Taylor To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Modes, democracy and benevolent(?) dictatorship
For what it's worth, when I wrote Skink I decided to accept the 1.6 standard plus W: and w: and the Barfly decorations (T for trill, H for fermata, etc) as my first pass, and then add V: for the second release. Why? they seemed the most useful to me, as a user with fairly "non-esoteric" needs. wil Bob Archer wrote: At 02:28 AM 17-10-00 +0100, Richard Robinson wrote: Yes. I think we're both saying "six of one, half a dozen of the other", really, and the old "be liberal in what you accept and strict in what you output". And maybe that what's generated is more of a key to the situation than what's accepted. I am obviously not getting my point aross correctly. I've always been slightly suspicious of the "be liberal in what you accept and strict in what you output" rule, particularly when what you're accepting is, in many cases, human generated. I agree that what is generated is the key, however in the case of human generated abc, what is generated will be directtly influenced by what the programs will accept, so being liberal in what you accept leads to lots of non-standard abc. At 10:50 AM 17-10-00 +0100, Laurie Griffiths wrote: Right - programs should accept the widest choice but generate standard ABC. BUT Think about Barfly. It doesn't generate at all. If it accepts mangled syntax then it encourages and legitimises such mangling If it refuses to, then it is "broken" - so it needs careful thought. And any other "input only" ABC program (e.g. one that just converts to tadpoles, or one that just plays) it has the same characteristic. I don't know what the answer is. This is exactly my point, and why I asked the question about what superset of abc a new program writer would be advised to support. I notice that nobody has answered that yet. Bob To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html -- Wil Macaulay email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] voice: +1-(905)-886-7818 xt2253FAX: +1-(905)-886-7824 Syndesis Ltd. 28 Fulton Way Richmond Hill, Ont Canada L4B 1J5 "... pay no attention to the man behind the curtain ..." To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Modes, democracy and benevolent(?) dictatorship
I would like to see in BarFly is a "Save as standard abc" menu
command. A text file would be saved (and displayed) that preserves
as much of the active file as possible without using any features
not found in the current standard. V: lines and whatever else
would either be stripped or "commented out" (%). What would remain
would be readable by any program that adhered to the standard, and
would therefore be suitable for posting publicly.
How would this command know, when dealing with a four-part harmonization
of a hymn, whether the tune was in the soprano or tenor line?
I would have no use for this. When I violate the standard I know why
I'm doing it, and the "standard" version wouldn't express what I want.
I would rather post what I mean and leave it to the user to decide how
to handle it. It's not like these "violations" are easy - using the
"w:" feature is a hell of a lot of work and someone who's managed to
get a text underlay right is not just going to throw it all away again.
The following is nonstandard in only one respect, the variable-length
gracenotes (I think fermatas are standard now?) They're an essential
part of the music and if ABC can't represent them, well, as Schoenberg
said when somebody told him his violin concerto was too difficult to
play, "I want the little finger to grow longer. I can wait."
X:1
T:Salute on the Birth of Rory Mor MacLeod
S:Kilberry Book of Ceol Mor #35
M:C
L:1/8
Q:1/4=80
K:Hp
P:Ground
{ge4d}B{G}HB {G}B2 c3 B|{g}f{e}f {e}Hf2 {g}f4 |\
{g}e2 {fege}f2 a3 e|{g}feae {g}f4 |
{g}Bf {g}eB {GBG}c3 B|{g}f{e}f {e}Hf2 {g}f4 |\
{g}e2 {fege}f2 a3 e|{g}feae {g}f4||
{g}fa {eAfA}e2 f3 c|{g}e2 {fege}f2 {ag}a4 |\
fe ae f3 c|{g}e{A}He {A}e2 {g}He4||
{g}e2 {fege}f2 a3 e|{g}feae {g}f4 |\
{g}fa {eAfA}e2 f3 c|{g}ef {g}ef {ag}a4|]
=== http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/ ===
To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Modes, democracy and benevolent(?) dictatorship
At 09:41 PM 10/15/2000 EDT, you wrote: http://members.aol.com/LewesArmsFolk/Lewesfav.html. It appears on the abc homepage under abc collections as "Favourite English dance tunes from the Lewes sessions, Sussex". I'd like this to be accessible to other people's software. That being the case, Brian, then the first thing I'd do is put those abcs out on the site in plain text format, rather than, or at least in addition to the zipped files. Every site I've seen listed on the ABC index on Chris Walshaw's site has the notation out in plain text, and there are some good reasons for doing it that way. If you made your tunes available in plain text, they'd be easily searchable by the same means that everyone else's are. Second, it would give visitors the option of downloading the specific tunes they want, rather than an entire file. Just as an aside, there is another perspective on the "democracy" question that you've been steadfastly ignoring, which I feel needs to be pointed out by someone who isn't one of the developers: these folks who work on these programs generously *donate* their time to it. They are volunteers, they put in whatever time they can, when they can, and should be applauded for that, not subjected to ridicule, abuse and per- sonal attacks. If you are running into resistance, perhaps you should consider that in many of your posts, your tone has been, er, somewhat less than respectful. Wendy To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] Modes, democracy and benevolent(?) dictatorship
... http://members.aol.com/LewesArmsFolk/Lewesfav.html. ... Bryan Lewes. I do hope that you have avoided or survived the floods without damage. Laurie To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
[abcusers] Modes, democracy and benevolent(?) dictatorship
Phil Taylor says - Any system of democracy involves a franchise: there are always some people who are entitled to vote and some who are not. We don't allow children, criminals, lunatics or the Queen to elect our politicians I'm sure "the vast majority of users" will be glad to know the high regard you hold them in. (Bags I be Queen first.) Now if you don't like that Bryan, you know what you can do. Well, if I do write some more software (I think that's what you meant) please bear in mind that you will have as little influence on mine as I do on yours and, since I WILL be taking notice of what the vast majority of users want, I may have more influence than you'd like. I am reluctant to respond to John Atchley's posting because he will only accuse me of more whining but here goes. It is precisely because all the people you mention have made such important contributions to abc software development that I have tried to present my case with reasoned arguments rather than going it alone as you recommend. And then there is Bryan, whose first and so far only contribution to the abc user community is a program that will tell us when our abc notation is "wrong." Come on! Everybody has to start somewhere, and my ABCchecker doesn't tell you when things are "wrong", it tells you when they don't conform to the standard. If something you want doesn't appear in the standard, campaign to get it put in. That was part of the point of the exercise. I don't think there is a developer on this list who wouldn't love to see a responsive and flexible, but concrete and comprehensive, abc standard. Maybe, they just don't seem to be prepared to do anything to bring this about. Chris Walshaw (who invented abc, remember?) has published a draft standard and says "A new version of the standard is under discussion on the abcusers mail list". I don't seem to have seen much constructive input. As Phil pointed out, there is a sort of informal democratic process at work in the development of the abc standard. I don't think Phil is into informal processes. His style is more laying down the law. His idea of democracy is "Lets all agree to do what I say." If you want to vote, then write some software, I think every abc user should have an equal right to vote whether they have written any software or not (actually, I have, remember?). or convince a developer that your desire is reasonable. What the ^£$*@# do you think I've been trying to do? I've been met with intransigence, misrepresentation, "We know best!" and downright abuse all the way. Bryan, if the K:^f syntax is so important to you, then begin using it. Well, I've already been given a ticking off by one who identified themselves with WE for trying to implement something that wasn't supported by abc2win. Now you seem to be telling me that that is exactly what I should do. Laurie Griffiths suggested that I use my Noteworthy to abc conversion programme to produce abc files unreadable by any other software, but at least he knew he was being sarcastic. write some software of your own that uses it. I will, but as I have said, abc is useless as an exchange medium if we are not all talking the same language. Add it to your abc source checker, having it print a warning that it is not yet adopted in the standard. I already have. Use it in the copious amounts of abc notation that you are transcribing and contributing to the user community (what was that URL, BTW?) http://members.aol.com/LewesArmsFolk/Lewesfav.html. It appears on the abc homepage under abc collections as "Favourite English dance tunes from the Lewes sessions, Sussex". I'd like this to be accessible to other people's software. If you are right, and there is sufficient demand for the syntax, other developers will follow you and John Chambers and begin incorporating it into their software. Well, Phil Taylor believes that "the vast majority of users" would use it and this is (part of) his reason for opposing it becoming part of the standard. At that point, like the V: syntax, it will matter little whether it is in the standard; for better or worse it will have become a defacto part of the language. But V: is not a defacto part of the language. It is used by a limited number of packages and will continue to be so until a precise syntax definition is availabe, preferably as part of the standard. If Phil objects that's his problem. It certainly is. Instead of arguing and whining, just press on. I would rather arrive at concensus of opinion. "Pressing on" produces a discoordinated shambles. Of course, if you want to produce midi output from your abc you'll have to invest as much time and energy as he and the other developers on this list by writing a midi player that handles the syntax. When you prove yourself willing to do that, the rest of us might take your recommendations a bit more seriously. I have never
