Re: MNX Example Score Repository

Matt: The idea of using CSS (or something similar) is to separate the
semantics from the presentation. This is a good engineering practice in
general, and is why HTML and CSS are separate. Many HTML developers used
inline CSS after it was introduced, but this is very rarely used today. I
think it's important for music notation to separate the semantics from the
presentation given all the potential use cases, as well as all of the
devices that the music could be viewed on. Remember, there are a lot of
other uses of music notation other than transferring data between notation
apps (though that is the primary use case today).

That being said, I do agree with you somewhat on how the numbers are
encoded, but I don't think additional XML markup is the solution. Parsing
CSS is moderately difficult, but parsing strings like this isn't
particularly difficult.

Adrian: I'll try to encode a C major scale tonight. So far, the only thing
I've encoded is a C major chord that last for a dotted quarter note
duration, which appears below. I have no idea how "correct" it is, and lots
of things are missing, but this is my first attempt at MNX encoding.
Comments welcome and appreciated as we all start to wrap our heads around
this.

<mnx xmlns="http://www.w3.org/mnx">
  <head>
  </head>
  <score>
    <system>
    </system>
    <part>
      <measure>
        <sequence>
          <event value=”4*">
            <stem>up</stem>
            <note pitch="C4"/>
            <note pitch="E4"/>
            <note pitch="G4"/>
          </event>
        </sequence>
      </measure>
    </part>
  </score>
</mnx>


On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Adrian Holovaty <adrian@holovaty.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Joe Berkovitz <joe@noteflight.com> wrote:
>
>> I have so far held off in order to avoid "example thrash" since
>> converting a set of convincingly complex scores is non-trivial labor, and I
>> think some of the structural underpinnings of MNX are not settled enough. I
>> think once we get an initial round of feedback (the next several weeks?)
>> then it will make sense to get on this.
>>
>
> My two cents: it would be a *lot* easier for people to grasp (and give
> feedback on) this new format if they had a full example to look at, right
> at the top of the proposal.
>
> Reading a technical specification is one thing; seeing actual examples is
> much more digestible. And the examples don't have to be complex — a simple
> encoding of "Hot Cross Buns" would give people a sense of the overall shape
> of an MNX document.
>
> I know it's tempting to delay the effort due to a shifting spec, and I
> understand the temptation to wait for a complex example to demonstrate
> advanced features. But "Hot Cross Buns" ain't difficult. If it is, then the
> spec has bigger problems. :-)
>
> Adrian
>

Received on Tuesday, 21 March 2017 15:59:19 UTC