Re: MNX design goal: reduction of "book-keeping and post-processing"

On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 6:22 PM, notenlektorat <post@notenlektorat.de>
wrote:

> Is there a simple
> example that would show how MusicXML is problematic in that way and how
> "more strict definitions" could improve the current state?
>

Two quick examples:

1. MusicXML has a concept of "your musical position while reading the
document" — which can be altered with <forward> and <backward> elements.
This means that, in order to parse a MusicXML document, you need to keep
track of the current musical position as you parse (this is considered
"bookkeeping").

2. In MusicXML, if three notes share the same stem (i.e., they're a chord),
the first note is encoded as a normal <note> and the other two <note>s have
a <chord> subelement. This makes it difficult to quickly determine which
notes are in a chord together. You need to look at previous/subsequent
<note> elements to see whether they have a <chord> subelement set.

Hope this helps —
Adrian

--
Adrian Holovaty
Soundslice: https://www.soundslice.com/
Personal: http://www.holovaty.com/