- From: cecilios via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 22:18:56 +0000
- To: public-music-notation-contrib@w3.org
cecilios has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/musicxml: == Suppress the 'non-controlling' attribute in measures == Excuse my English. If something is not clear please ask me for clarifications. I propose to suppress the 'non-controlling' attribute in measures. I think there are some conceptual problems about the 'non-controlling' attribute that I would like to share. I understand that MusicXML inherits the 'non-controlling' concept from MuseData, probably without much questioning. I assume that in MuseData this attribute is just a 'trick' for dealing with multi-metric music. But for a modern web standard these kind of tricks should be avoided. MusicXML can provide explicit information about line breaks and page breaks, as well as much more formatting information. Therefore, no need for tricks. Either export all formatting information or do not export it at all and leave the importer application to deal with formatting. In any case, MusicXML importers need to be prepared to deal with files with no formatting information. The 'non-controlling' attribute adds nothing but noise! It can be argued that this attribute doesn't cause harm and can be of help. But: 1. Where is this concept clearly defined? This is the only definition I found (from DTD): " The non-controlling attribute is intended for use in multimetric music like the Don Giovanni minuet. If set to "yes", the left barline in this measure does not coincide with the left barline of measures in other parts. The value is "no" if not specified. " With this definition the value of this attribute can be easily computed just by analysing the time position of barlines! Do we need to explicitly encode an easily derivable value? It is good practice not to represent derived values, only primitive ones. Among other issues, inconsistencies could arise. 2. Is this attribute mandatory? No!!! Then, why any line break algorithm should bother about it? The layout algorithms can not rely on this attribute as it might not be present when needed! But on the contrary, it adds work for MusicXML export (unless, as it is not mandatory, the exporter program decides not to deal with it!). What is the benefit from having this attribute? 3. Its mere existence 'contaminates' any music program trying to export MusicXML format: if a web standard needs it, this transmits the idea that for music layout this is necessary information, being difficult to do proper layout without it. And somehow may condition internal music representation. It should be expected that line-break algorithms are prepared for breaking lines at barlines, but also line-break algorithms should naturally deal with music with no barlines at all, without relaying on more tricks (non-visible barlines). And multi-metric music is just an intermediate case between both, in which breaks should be allowed only at barlines common to all parts. If my interpretation is wrong and the 'non-controlling' concept is more than explicitly signalling easily deducible information from barlines alignment in time, then the concept needs clarification. Probably, it is a new concept: 'hints' for algorithms? This will open the door for demanding more 'hints': why hints for line break and not for other tasks? So, if my understanding is correct and I did'nt miss anything, I would suggest to consider removing this attribute. Otherwise, I would appreciate clarifications. Thank you! Regards, Cecilio Salmeron Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/musicxml/issues/115 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 13 January 2016 22:18:59 UTC