- From: Joe Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2017 08:21:19 -0400
- To: notenlektorat <post@notenlektorat.de>, public-music-notation-contrib@w3.org
Received on Wednesday, 5 April 2017 12:21:54 UTC
Hi Alex, As previously discussed, here's an encoding of the previously supplied Ligeti example: https://w3c.github.io/mnx/ideas/Ligeti-VII.xml I omitted some of the less controversial bits like text, and also elided some measures since I ran out of time, but I think this addresses the structural questions in the piece. To reiterate: this piece is really on the edge of what I would ask MNX to do. The encoding makes a few modest proposals for stretching MNX to accommodate it, but the fact that they work is the result of some fortunate (or wise?) choices by the composer. Beware the slippery slope! If you bring a slightly more exotic score to the table, it might well fall on the other side of what's reasonable (and some may feel even this Ligeti encoding isn't reasonable!). At which point I'll probably say the same thing I've been saying a lot lately: once we step outside that box, we must use a second, far more abstract approach and begin to step away from CWMN, if we want to build applications that work together reliably. . . . . . ...Joe
Received on Wednesday, 5 April 2017 12:21:54 UTC