Re: music expression explanation

[Trevor Daniels]

Graham Percival wrote Saturday, April 25, 2009 12:53 PM


> On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 12:31:14PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
> > Graham Percival wrote Saturday, April 25, 2009 10:13 AM
> >
> > > Eh?!?!  You want to tell people to put articulation and dynamic
> > > marks after the duration, before they've been told how to do
> > > articulations and dynamics?  Remember that the idea is to give a
> > > general:
> > > @var{pitch} @var{dur} @var{other}
> >
> > No, you should.  This thread has nothing to do
> > with articulation and dynamics.  It is to to
> > with the relative order of octave marks and
> > durations.
>
> Yes, the *initial* concern was over the relative order of octave
> marks and durations.  My *current* concern is that if it's
> possible for people to get confused over
> c4'
> then surely they could also get confused over
> c'\mf4

As often happens with these threads, the initial
point can easily get lost.

> If so, there's two options:
> 1) give a general explanation of pitch-dur-other.  In addition to
> that order, explain that the order of "other" doesn't matter.
> 2) give an explanation of pitch-dur, then later on explain
> pitch-dur-other (or maybe "note-other", or something like that)
>
> I thought that #1 would be best, but if you'd rather go with #2, I
> have no objection.

I think we need both.  Let's clear up the order of
octave marks and durations as I suggested in LM 2.1.2
with Simon's help.  Then, because the order in which
items may appear in a notation element is quite complex
this needs to go in the Notation Reference, if it
is to be anything like comprehensive.  Carl's
parser grammar will be useful as an appendix, but
something along the lines of the note Trevor Baca wrote
some time ago to explain the permitted order of items in
a notation element would be suitable, except I can't
find it now.  Can anyone locate this?

Trevor