Re: [abcusers] developers/users
On Wednesday 24 January 2001 19:44, you wrote: Maybe an abc2mtx converter would help! How much would you charge for a working one? Windows version...of course! I do write windows apps yes. If you want to be a bit clearer about this `converter' I will consider it. Regards, RJP -- RJP - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sedric.demon.co.uk. To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] developers/users
Bryan said "... There is a maxim in the commercial computer world that says "Don't start the development until you've finished the design."... " Yep, but it's mainly ignored. There is also something called "schedule pressure". If you are playing noughts and crosses, (USA: "tic tac toe") I recommend that you don't play your first move until you have figured out the whole game. I suggest you try chess. Trying to understand everything before you start is very often a recipe for not starting. All the programs we see are ones where someone started. Sometimes, we see where things are going. Sometimes we play what looks like an interesting move and see what happens. Ten moves later we may be wondering, "how did we get here?" Laurie To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] developers/users
Phil: The only responsibility I acknowledge towards the users is to make sure that it won't do them any harm (carry viruses, corrupt their operating system etc). Bryan: Well giving them software that produces "abc" that is inconsistent with any other abc isn't exactly doing them favours is it? Me: But that's what market forces are all about. It's the customer's job to decide how many favours and how many disfavours the software bestows. If their whims differ too much from the developers then they won't use it. If enough of them like it then eventually the world will come round to it. Doing line ends with ! was a mistake, but I think most software now handles it. Laurie To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] developers/users
Bryan: Let's make the standard ABC thing concrete: Given that I can work on at most one of the following, which should I do: 1. Make Muse fully support standard ABC (1.6 or 1.7.6 or whatever). (It's somewhere close but there are gaps and the odd error). 2. Make Muse be able to take input from a piano keyboard and emit ABC? 3. Make Muse properly support hammer-on, string-bending and pull-offs for guitarists. Note: I said *at most* one - I'm not making promises. Laurie P.S. Existing paying customers have repeatedly asked for numbers 2 and 3. To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] developers/users
Wil Macaulay says - But any text within double quotes that _does_ start with one of those symbols can be safely used as an annotation, so IT IS NOW POSSIBLE to write an abc file that can be safely played by abc2midi (or BarFly, or Muse) and properly displayed by abc2ps (or BarFly or Muse). I seem to recall that during the debate on the sharps/flats version of the K: command you said - if you write your abc/Noteworthy converter to use a version of abc that is not in the 1.6 standard (I'm not even talking about 1.7 extensions here) you will be creating tunes that are not readable by abc2win, which is the most common abc platform for windows. Bad move. I quite agree. Have you changed that advice? Here's where I really believe that you just "don't get it" - software DOESN'T produce abc, people do. And guns don't kill people or perhaps an analogy closer to home would be "Instruments don't make music, people do." But that doesn't absolve instrument makers from responsibility for the quality of their instruments. Musicians can make better music with better instruments. People will twist it to serve their own needs, if they don't have a good way to do it in the standard, and if those needs are seen as useful to multiple people they will get addressed, eventually. There is a maxim in the commercial computer world that says "Don't start the development until you've finished the design." Since this is almost never observed it is cynically twisted to "Don't finish the development before you've started the design." The latter seems to be policy in the abc community. Phil Taylor says - The problem here lies not with the proposed mechanism, but with the fact that the original (v1.5 abc) guitar chord format permitted abuse, and we can't go back in time and change it retrospectively. I'm afraid he is right. Presumably guitar chords were originally seen as simple text. We are stuck with the results but can't we learn from the experience and try not to make the same sort of mistake again? It sounds as if I won't be able to use Phil's transcription of the Goldberg Variations. Can they really be said to be written in abc rather than in BarFly output code? Bryan To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] developers/users
Laurie Griffiths says - But that's what market forces are all about. It's the customer's job to decide how many favours and how many disfavours the software bestows. Maybe that's why abc2win is so popular. If their whims differ too much from the developers then they won't use it. BarFly has something of a monopoly in the MAC market. Doing line ends with ! was a mistake, but I think most software now handles it. But what about the use of ! as a delimeter in 1.7.6. This needs to be resolved before it is implemented. Bryan To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] developers/users
Bryan Creer wrote: It sounds as if I won't be able to use Phil's transcription of the Goldberg Variations. Can they really be said to be written in abc rather than in BarFly output code? A C program which makes use of the Windows API is still written in C, even though the source code won't compile elsewhere. It's just using a set of extensions appropriate to that particular job. I have extended abc to deal with Baroque keyboard music and Gregorian Chant. The extensions are not particularly complex (not compared with the Windows API anyway), so you could implement them if you needed to. If you want to do Gregorian Chant you can use Melody Assistant, which is available for Windows and Mac and incorporates the same Gregorian Chant extensions as BarFly. No other program has yet implemented the macros which are required to deal with Bach's decorations. BarFly has something of a monopoly in the MAC market. There's macabc2mtex (now very old) macabc2ps macmidi2abc Melody Assistant Virtual Composer abc4mac Skink Phil Taylor To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] developers/users
I wrote: There's macabc2mtex (now very old) macabc2ps macmidi2abc Melody Assistant Virtual Composer abc4mac Skink Oops, forgot the one which I ported myself - James's yaps. Phil Taylor To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] developers/users
Well giving them software that produces "abc" that is inconsistent with any other abc isn't exactly doing them favours is it? BarFly doesn't produce ABC, the user does. It's a text editor that *can* create ABC but doesn't impose any structure at all on the documents it produces. Thank God. I'd find any other model useless. === http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/ === To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] developers/users
On Wednesday 24 January 2001 01:00, you wrote: Laura: The reason the guitar chord notation got co-opted for text annotations is that many, many users needed a text annotation of some kind. Bryan: No. This is a reason for developing a text annotation system, not a reason for co-opting the guitar chord notation. Couldn't they have developed something new instead of messing up something that already existed? Dead right! The best thing about abc is being able to write out single line melodies with `a violence Tulloch' type chord accompaniment -- as a demo for the band. If it can't do that, is no use to me (for a start). This particular user doesn't give a damn about conflicts with the guitar chord syntax because I never need to write guitar chordings (and usually remove them from other people's ABC before using it myself). Not a bad idea really -but if one has a guitarist who keeps asking - `tis a mighty handy thing to be able to do! On the other hand, since we seldom need to notate the peculiar trills used by a zambian nose-bagpipe-flautist, we (along with many others) feel no pressing need for such a facility. Developers are *not* the only people who get a say in what ABC ought to be, or what it should be used for. O yes they are! all the Linux software for abc is FREE, so I think nobody has the right to ask the `developers' to do ANYTHING. - without paying them that is! If someone makes a deal with me to do a programming job, then I do it the way they want it for pay - but not otherwise. If I program for myself - then I do EXACTLY what I want - and i would be surprised of most developers do not do just the same. There are quite a lot of composition packages around already - some of them shareware. Would it not be better to keep abc simple and concentrate on providing means of importing / exporting abc to some of these packages? - by providing parsing routines for selected shareware authors for ex. That way, abc can still be used to `sketch' the music express the salient points, whilst adding the `bells and whistles' using something else that CAN ALREADY do it... This could of course, result in loss of detail when abc is re-exported, which one would have to accept, since any conceivable abc notation will still probably be insufficient for a lot of the advanced music typograpy.. The `simplistic' users can continue to use abc for free, and those who actually want all the extra programming effort can pay - seems fair to me! The only other course open to someone determined not to pay for software but still wanting special funstions is to do what the rest of us do - get out gcc / emacs / TeX and get started! Regards, RJP -- RJP - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sedric.demon.co.uk. To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] developers/users
Somebody wrote: Laura: The reason the guitar chord notation got co-opted for text annotations is that many, many users needed a text annotation of some kind. Bryan: No. This is a reason for developing a text annotation system, not a reason for co-opting the guitar chord notation. Couldn't they have developed something new instead of messing up something that already existed? That's exactly what we did, Bryan. The system of using ^ and _ to denote annotations over or under the staff was proposed by Wil Macaulay about two years ago and incorporated in the next version of BarFly (which also allows and to place the annotation to the left or right of the note head when you want to annotate a particular note in a chord). Most programs have followed suit. Developers are *not* the only people who get a say in what ABC ought to be, or what it should be used for. O yes they are! all the Linux software for abc is FREE, so I think nobody has the right to ask the `developers' to do ANYTHING. - without paying them that is! If someone makes a deal with me to do a programming job, then I do it the way they want it for pay - but not otherwise. If I program for myself - then I do EXACTLY what I want - and i would be surprised of most developers do not do just the same. Dead right. I wrote BarFly for myself because I was tired of struggling with abc2mtex. I put it up on the web for other users free use on a take it or leave it basis. The only responsibility I acknowledge towards the users is to make sure that it won't do them any harm (carry viruses, corrupt their operating system etc). I do read and reply to their letters, and have implemented many of their suggestions. But I don't have to. Phil Taylor To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] developers/users
Developers are *not* the only people who get a say in what ABC ought to be, or what it should be used for. O yes they are! all the Linux software for abc is FREE, so I think nobody has the right to ask the `developers' to do ANYTHING. - without paying them that is! The point is that since ABC is just text, a user like me can put whatever the hell they like in it, and whether any computer implementation can make sense of it is a secondary issue. Luckily for me, BarFly doesn't get too badly flummoxed by the notations I need to use. ABC doesn't even need to be constrained by typeability. I have hundreds of pages of ABC written in pencil. For most of it, I notated the slurs by drawing them above the text lines in the same way as in staff notation: much more readable, and easy to convert when I got round to typing it in. I don't give a damn whether anyone implements a computer analogue of that. I also have a bunch of cue cards written in two colours of ink giving the first bar or two of tunes in sets I play. Needless to say these do not have regular header fields, they'd be a waste of space. It's non- standard and non-computer-processable ABC but it's still ABC (i.e. any human who knew the notation could read it) and it's useful. That way, abc can still be used to `sketch' the music express the salient points, whilst adding the `bells and whistles' using something else that CAN ALREADY do it... This could of course, result in loss of detail when abc is re-exported, which one would have to accept, since any conceivable abc notation will still probably be insufficient for a lot of the advanced music typograpy.. This is arse-backwards for what I'm doing. I need to be able to notate every single musically relevant detail from my sources - mistakes and all. Some of this information might be lost in editing/typesetting. My ABC source is richer in musical information than a typographic file would be. The only other course open to someone determined not to pay for software but still wanting special funstions is to do what the rest of us do - get out gcc / emacs / TeX and get started! I'd like to, but (a) the abc2mtex port for the Mac doesn't work and is unsupported and (b) nobody's done an MPW port of any PS or TeX converter that I could use as a starting point (MPW is the only free C compiler for the Mac). I know zilch about GUI programming, have no interest in learning it, and am not about to waste a year of my life reinventing wheels. If I can get one of my old Suns working, I'll be in a better position to do some ABC implementation, as I'll be able to disregard the GUI stuff. === http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/ === To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] developers/users
There are quite a lot of composition packages around already - some of them shareware. Would it not be better to keep abc simple and concentrate on providing means of importing / exporting abc to some of these packages? This is exactly what happened in the case of Muse. I added ABC to it because the drummer in our band had been using an ABC package - abc2ps I think. Laurie To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
RE: [abcusers] developers/users
Definitely not the case with Windows, although the DOS software (for the most part) appears to be free. ...and one can always ask the developers for anything. Whether or not they think it worthwhile to implement is up to them. "Richard L Walker"[EMAIL PROTECTED] Pensacola, FL 32504-7726 USA -Original Message- O yes they are! all the Linux software for abc is FREE, so I think nobody has the right to ask the 'developers' to do ANYTHING. - without paying them that is! To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] developers/users
Hi, RJP You have been able to sum up a confuse and misleading debate in a few words, and make some sensible considerations, but you are wrong on one pont. Developers are *not* the only people who get a say in what ABC ought to be, or what it should be used for. You wrote: O yes they are! all the Linux software for abc is FREE, so I think nobody has the right to ask the `developers' to do ANYTHING. - without paying them that is! If someone makes a deal with me to do a programming job, then I do it the way they want it for pay - but not otherwise. If I program for myself - then I do EXACTLY what I want - and i would be surprised of most developers do not do just the same. What in fact we are arguing about is the right of the developers on this list - which, please remeber it, are in fact a minority of the developers of the ac related softewares available to the community of the users - to be the only ones entitled to decide about the future develpments of the notation. The use of the guitar chords syntax to put text on the score is a topic example of how a need expressed by the users has been incorporated in the draft in a way which fits some of the available packages, but won't work with a number of sharewares that 'speak abc'. I agree with you that: There are quite a lot of composition packages around already - some of them shareware. Would it not be better to keep abc simple and concentrate on providing means of importing / exporting abc to some of these packages? - by providing parsing routines for selected shareware authors for ex. In fact there is a number of excellent and often unexpensive notation programs which already import/export the notation. Unfortunately, to work with them we need an upadated standard to stuck to - not sure you have noticed it, but the current standard is still one line of music, in the Key of G, with four octaves of extension! If I had to complain with the developers of the abc speaking package I have registered about the poor support they are offering for the abc notation, the obvious replay would be that to make it work correctly they will wait until the current one will be updated. This is why, in fact, I suggested we could discuss the opportunity to take the draft as it is now - i.e. without any agreement about the V: lines - as the new standard, and eventually update it again when the riotous developers on this list will have found some agreement about that. Any further delay is working against the widespread and the promotion of the abc notation, and this is in fact the developers' (on this list) responsability. That way, abc can still be used to `sketch' the music express the salient points, whilst adding the `bells and whistles' using something else that CAN ALREADY do it... This could of course, result in loss of detail when abc is re-exported, which one would have to accept, since any conceivable abc notation will still probably be insufficient for a lot of the advanced music typograpy.. The `simplistic' users can continue to use abc for free, and those who actually want all the extra programming effort can pay - seems fair to me! This is what I had in mind when I suggested that we should keep separate the notation and what concers its future developments from the packages we use to manipulate it (to print scores, generate Midis, an so on...). Not a popular idea (to contrary belief?). The only other course open to someone determined not to pay for software but still wanting special funstions is to do what the rest of us do - get out gcc / emacs / TeX and get started! Maybe an abc2mtx converter would help! How much would you charge for a working one? Windows version...of course! BYE! Gianni To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] developers/users
Richard Robinson wrote: On Wed, 24 Jan 2001, Jack Campin wrote: The only other course open to someone determined not to pay for software but still wanting special funstions is to do what the rest of us do - get out gcc / emacs / TeX and get started! I'd like to, but (a) the abc2mtex port for the Mac doesn't work and is unsupported and (b) nobody's done an MPW port of any PS or TeX converter that I could use as a starting point (MPW is the only free C compiler for the Mac). I know zilch about GUI programming, have no interest in learning it, and am not about to waste a year of my life reinventing wheels. If I can get one of my old Suns working, I'll be in a better position to do some ABC implementation, as I'll be able to disregard the GUI stuff. What's with this story about the New Mac OS being some kind of Unixy variant ? Will that give Mac people access to all the GNU stuff ? Yes, it's BSD Unix underneath. You can run gcc and compile all the same stuff on it. There are also at least two variants of linux which will run on Macs. but the advantage of OSX is that you can run classic Mac programs at the same time. None of this helps Jack though, as none of it will work on his antique 68K Macs. MPW will run OK though, and if he can find a copy, the old Apple Unix A/UX will also work. Phil Taylor To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
Re: [abcusers] developers/users
Bryan, I think you've hit on the nub of the (pick one) disagreement/ argument/difference in world view between yourself and many of the people on this list [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Phil Taylor says - The system of using ^ and _ to denote annotations over or under the staff was proposed by Wil Macaulay about two years ago and incorporated in the next version of BarFly (which also allows and to place the annotation to the left or right of the note head when you want to annotate a particular note in a chord). Most programs have followed suit. This is still a bodge of the guitar chord system and too little too late. It isn't safe to assume that any text within double quotes that doesn't start with one of those symbols is a chord. Correct. But any text within double quotes that _does_ start with one of those symbols can be safely used as an annotation, so IT IS NOW POSSIBLE to write an abc file that can be safely played by abc2midi (or BarFly, or Muse) and properly displayed by abc2ps (or BarFly or Muse). Sure, it is also possible to write one that plays weirdly... The only responsibility I acknowledge towards the users is to make sure that it won't do them any harm (carry viruses, corrupt their operating system etc). Well giving them software that produces "abc" that is inconsistent with any other abc isn't exactly doing them favours is it? Here's where I really believe that you just "don't get it" - software DOESN'T produce abc, people do. People will twist it to serve their own needs, if they don't have a good way to do it in the standard, and if those needs are seen as useful to multiple people they will get addressed, eventually. But you can still type random strings into a file and _something_ will happen, just like you can still divide by zero in a c++ module. Sorry for shouting... Bryan 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
