RE: Getting Off The Ground

Dear all,

 

Context: I’m an independent music engraver working for several musicological publishing houses at Argentina (v.g. Gourmet Musical Ediciones - http://www.gourmetmusicalediciones.com/ -, and also a Psychology of Music teacher at University of Buenos Aires - http://artes.filo.uba.ar/psicolog%C3%AD-auditiva -)

 

As my main interest is in the field of musicology, I mostly work on musical examples, and I often deal with graphical problems related to the question “how can I communicate my thoughts on this music, showing them on a score?”. 

 

The question for contemporary music notation has already been raised here, and I’d like to add that there’s a need for musicological notation too (vg. Schenkerian analysis).

 

The problem of semantics is one I particularly care about, since most authors send me their own engraved versions of the examples, and I often find myself having to fully re-engrave them, adding non-expected costs to the publishers.

 

Hope this group can benefit from my field, as I’m sure I will from yours.

 

Regards,

 

Hernán.

 

 

De: Knut Nergaard [mailto:knut.nergaard@gmail.com] 
Enviado el: miércoles, 30 de septiembre de 2015 11:59 p.m.
Para: public-music-notation-contrib@w3.org
Asunto: Re: Getting Off The Ground

 

Den 30. sep. 2015 kl. 16:29 skrev "James Sutton" <jrs@jmsutton.co.uk>:





3. SMuFL



   I'm not clear why the MusicXML standard needs to be coupled to a font mapping standard. Wouldn't it be simpler for each standard to stand alone?


>From a font developer standpoint, I second this, and in light of the differing fields of knowledge and issues constituting the MusicXML and SMuFL communities, I would think it would be appropriate with different sub-groups/mailing lists.

I for one have questions and suggestions related specifically to SMuFL, most of which I think would be of no immediate interest to the MusicXML community. 

Knut Nergaard