
Ok, this all seems plausible. But warming up the second issue: How would I go about supplying rendition information for the unknown neume? That should happen in the symbolDef, shouldn't it? How do I give a reference size, indicating how big the symbol is in comparison to other symbols or e.g. the line distance?<br><br>B<br><br>----- Reply message -----<br>Von: "Roland, Perry (pdr4h)" <pdr4h@eservices.virginia.edu><br>An: "Music Encoding Initiative" <mei-l@lists.uni-paderborn.de><br>Betreff: [MEI-L] symbol/symbolDef<br>Datum: Mi., Mär. 21, 2012 15:01<br><br><br>> But back to the original question:  It seems that using <symbol> or<br>> @altsym for classifying unknown symbols (in any context) isn't<br>> something that I should encourage in the guidelines.  At least that's<br>> my interim conclusion of the discussion so far.<br><br>Correct.  Especially since your example can be simplified, as in the following:<br><br><?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><br><mei xmlns="http://www.music-encoding.org/ns/mei"><br>  <meiHead><br>    <fileDesc><br>      <titleStmt><br>        <title/><br>      </titleStmt><br>      <pubStmt/><br>      <sourceDesc><br>        <source><br>          <physDesc><br>            <handList><br>              <hand xml:id="handB"><br>                <name>Beta</name><br>              </hand><br>              <hand xml:id="handC"><br>                <name>Gamma</name><br>              </hand><br>            </handList><br>          </physDesc><br>          <history><br>            <creation><br>              <geogName xml:id="mon_Alpha">monastery Alpha</geogName><br>            </creation><br>          </history><br>        </source><br>      </sourceDesc><br>    </fileDesc><br>  </meiHead><br>  <music><br>    <facsimile><br>      <surface><br>        <graphic target="facsimile00001.jpg"/><br>        <zone data="#symbolAB123_description" xml:id="symbolAB123_example" ulx="180" uly="66"<br>          lrx="220" lry="81"/><br>        <zone data="#symbolCD456_description" xml:id="symbolCD456_example" ulx="3475" uly="1290"<br>          lrx="3510" lry="1302"/><br>      </surface><br>    </facsimile><br>    <body><br>      <mdiv><br>        <score><br>          <scoreDef><br>            <!-- scoreDef-y stuff--><br>          </scoreDef><br>          <annot xml:id="symbolAB123_description" plist="#symbolAB123_example">This symbol can be found in sources stemming from <ref<br>              target="#mon_Alpha">monastery Alpha</ref> and is used by hands <ref target="#handB"<br>              >Beta</ref> and <ref target="#handC">Gamma</ref>. It frequently appears after a<br>            clivis. It's meaning is unknown. </annot><br>          <annot xml:id="symbolCD456_description" plist="#symbolCD456_example"><br>            <!-- Something interesting about this symbol --><br>          </annot><br>          <section><br>            <staff><br>              <layer><br>                <syllable><br>                  <syl>bla</syl><br>                  <uneume name="clivis"/><br>                  <uneume facs="#symbolAB123_example"/><br>                </syllable><br>                <syllable><br>                  <syl>bla</syl><br>                  <uneume name="clivis"/><br>                  <uneume facs="#symbolAB123_example"/><br>                  <uneume facs="#symbolCD456_example"/><br>                </syllable><br>                <!-- ... --><br>              </layer><br>            </staff><br>          </section><br>        </score><br>      </mdiv><br>    </body><br>  </music><br></mei><br><br>Instead of using <symbolDef> as an intermediary, uneume/@facs points directly to the facsimile/zone.  annot/@plist also points to the zone so that every uneume doesn't have to be enumerated, however, I think this is somewhat suspect.  It's better to just pick one neume as an exemplar: <br><br>...<br><annot xml:id="symbolAB123_description" plist="#symbolAB123">This symbol can be found in sources stemming from <ref<br>target="#mon_Alpha">monastery Alpha</ref> and is used by hands <ref target="#handB">Beta</ref> and <ref target="#handC">Gamma</ref>. It frequently appears after a clivis. It's meaning is unknown. </annot><br>...<br><uneume xml:id="symbolAB123" facs="#symbolAB123_example"/><br>...<br><br><br>--<br>p.<br><br>__________________________<br>Perry Roland<br>Music Library<br>University of Virginia<br>P. O. Box 400175<br>Charlottesville, VA 22904<br>434-982-2702 (w)<br>pdr4h (at) virginia (dot) edu<br>________________________________________<br>From: mei-l-bounces@lists.uni-paderborn.de [mei-l-bounces@lists.uni-paderborn.de] on behalf of TW [zupftom@googlemail.com]<br>Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 3:54 AM<br>To: Music Encoding Initiative<br>Subject: Re: [MEI-L] symbol/symbolDef<br><br>2012/3/20 Roland, Perry (pdr4h) <pdr4h@eservices.virginia.edu>:<br>>> When talking with the Corpus monodicum people from Würzburg about<br>>> encoding their data in MEI, the problem occured that occansionally<br>>> they find neumes that they cannot interpret (yet).  However, those<br>>> neumes aren't just sloppily written, they clearly manifest a certain<br>>> kind of symbol as it is found repeatedly (for example within the works<br>>> of a certain scribe).  @facs doesn't express this, while @altsym could<br>>> do.<br>><br>> Please forgive me, but I don't understand what you're trying to say.  @facs doesn't express what?  The fact that they can't / don't want to say what a certain symbol is / means?  What does @altsym do in this case that @facs doesn't?<br>><br>> Whatever "it" is, @facs points to a region of an image and says "there it is", while @altsym points to a vector graphic and says "this is how you draw it".  Neither of these attributes has anything to do with interpretation.<br>><br>> Both of these require the encoder to make a decision about what "it" is by choosing an MEI element.  So, for a neume one can say<br>><br>> <neume @facs="d1" altsym="us1"/><br>> <!-- This is a neume, it's there at "d1", and instructions for rendering it are at "us1" --><br>><br>> Are you wanting <symbol> to function as a generic marker for an unknown sign?  That is, if a symbol's meaning is unknown, then are you looking for markup like --<br>><br>> <symbol @facs="d1 d2 d3 d4 d5"/><br>><br>> saying, in effect, "I don't know what this thing is, but it occurs 5 times"?<br><br>No, I was more thinking about something like this:<br><br><mei xmlns="http://www.music-encoding.org/ns/mei"><br>  <meiHead><br>    <fileDesc><br>      <titleStmt><br>        <title/><br>      </titleStmt><br>      <pubStmt/><br>      <sourceDesc><br>        <source><br>          <physDesc><br>            <handList><br>              <hand xml:id="handB"><br>                <name>Beta</name><br>              </hand><br>              <hand xml:id="handC"><br>                <name>Gamma</name><br>              </hand><br>            </handList><br>          </physDesc><br>          <history><br>            <creation><br>              <geogName xml:id="mon_Alpha">monastery Alpha</geogName><br>            </creation><br>          </history><br>        </source><br>      </sourceDesc><br>    </fileDesc><br>  </meiHead><br>  <music><br>    <facsimile><br>      <surface><br>        <graphic target="facsimile00001.jpg"/><br>        <zone data="#symbolAB123_description"<br>xml:id="symbolAB123_example" ulx="180" uly="66"<br>          lrx="220" lry="81"/><br>        <zone data="#symbolCD456_description"<br>xml:id="symbolCD456_example" ulx="3475" uly="1290"<br>          lrx="3510" lry="1302"/><br>      </surface><br>    </facsimile><br>    <body><br>      <mdiv><br>        <score><br>          <scoreDef><br>            <symbolTable><br>              <symbolDef xml:id="symbolAB123"><br>                <symbol facs="#symbolAB123_example"/><br>              </symbolDef><br>              <symbolDef xml:id="symbolCD456"><br>                <symbol facs="#symbolCD456_description"/><br>              </symbolDef><br>            </symbolTable><br>          </scoreDef><br>          <annot startid="#symbolAB123"><br>            This symbol can be found in sources stemming from <ref<br>target="#mon_Alpha">monastery Alpha</ref><br>            and is used by hands <ref target="#handB">Beta</ref> and<br><ref target="#handC">Gamma</ref>.<br>            It frequently appears after a clivis. It's meaning is unknown.<br>          </annot><br>          <annot startid="#symbolCD456"><br>            <!-- Something interesting about this symbol --><br>          </annot><br>          <section><br>            <staff><br>              <layer><br>                <syllable><br>                  <syl>bla</syl><br>                  <uneume name="clivis"/><br>                  <uneume altsym="#symbolAB123"/><br>                </syllable><br>                <syllable><br>                  <syl>bla</syl><br>                  <uneume name="clivis"/><br>                  <uneume altsym="#symbolAB123"/><br>                  <uneume altsym="#symbolCD456"/><br>                </syllable><br>                <!-- ... --><br>              </layer><br>            </staff><br>          </section><br>        </score><br>      </mdiv><br>    </body><br>  </music><br></mei><br><br>Does it at least make some sense?  It's not valid MEI as I gave the<br><symbol> elements inside symbolDef only a @facs rather than a @ref.<br>(Unfortunately, there aren't any examples for <annot>, <handList>,<br><creation> or <facsimile> on Google Code, so I'm using them as I<br>understand them.  But they're only meant as illustrative background<br>actors, anyway.)<br><br>><br>> This doesn't sound right to me because you already said they have *neumes"neumes", right?  So what's wrong with calling them neumes by using the <neume> element?<br>><br><br>Of course <uneume> would have to be used.  <uneume> has the @name<br>attribute that can be used to classify the symbol.  If there is a<br>symbol that doesn't fall in any of the categories that @name offers,<br>but still can be identified as a certain symbol, I would have used an<br>@altsym to point to the symbol, like shown above.  Of course one could<br>use <annot> or something to say "This is the neume of special type<br>pink-dog-with-green-tail", but I think @altsym is more accessible and<br>less cluttered.  For example, it's very straightforward to formulate a<br>search query "Find me all occurrences of pink-dog-with-green-tail".<br>Or if it should be found out that this is just a strange way of<br>writing a torculus, then @altsym can be replaced with the proper<br>@name.<br><br>But back to the original question:  It seems that using <symbol> or<br>@altsym for classifying unknown symbols (in any context) isn't<br>something that I should encourage in the guidelines.  At least that's<br>my interim conclusion of the discussion so far.<br><br>Thomas<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>mei-l mailing list<br>mei-l@lists.uni-paderborn.de<br>https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l<br>_______________________________________________<br>mei-l mailing list<br>mei-l@lists.uni-paderborn.de<br>https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l<br>