[MEI-L] Colla parte

[Raffaele Viglianti]

Hi Perry,


>  isn't "making more explicit" the meaning of something exactly what
> correcting, regularizing and expanding do?  For instance, if I mark "P.R."
> as an abbreviation and "Perry Roland" as its expansion, am I not making the
> meaning of "P.R." more explicit?
>
>
I think that in this case, the act of "making explicit" is suggesting a
textual replacement:
P.R. --> Perry Roland

and this is true for all the paired choices of sic/corr, orig/reg, etc. This
is an editorial intervention that directly influences the symbols that make
the text.

In the case of col Basso, the act of "making explicit" is defining a
function:
"col Basso" --> go and copy the measure below

This is why I don't think that there is any editorial intervention here, it
is a matter of explaining what this symbol "is". (Let's set aside the fact
that arguably, when doing a transcription, everything is editorial
interpretation; even using <note>)


> the words "col Basso" (or the wiggly line, whatever) remain separate from
> the realization encoding.  To do otherwise, would wreak havoc upon the
> distinction between events and control events that's built into MEI.  Unless
> someone WANTS to start over from scratch. :)
>

Ok, I understand and agree, sorry if I jumped to suggesting a new element
too fast! :) Still, I think that the direction "col Basso" itself is
functioning as a hypothetical "copyOf" element rather than its editorial
expansion. But if the direction and its function must be kept separated to
follow the event / control event distinction, then fine. What I think should
be evident from the encoding, though, is that this falls out of editorial
interventions, and falls into the category of saying what some text "is",
which is what happens with a lot of MEI elements (this is a note, this is a
direction, ...).

Best,
Raffaele


>
> BUT, what the content of <expan> or <reg> should be is a different
> question.  In the examples above and in the examples in the TEI guidelines,
> the content is explicitly stated; that is, every misspelling of the same
> word carries the same regularization.
>
> For those situations where the regularization exists elsewhere in the
> encoding, we could create a generic, "go-get-something-and-put-it-here"
> element.  I only suggested the name "colla" as a discussion-starter.  I
> believe it probably needs a more generic name, perhaps "copyOf", that would
> allow it to function in cases other than just colla parte.  Eleanor's point
> about references occuring just about anywhere is correct, although there's
> only so far we can go and maintain explicit markup.  Followed to the
> extreme, the markup becomes entirely procedural, not a good thing.  Already,
> the <copyOf> element introduces the same problems @copyof, namely, which
> parts of the target should actually be copied -- certainly not the target's
> @xml:id and probably not it's @n either.
>
> For the time being, I'd prefer solutions such as those above that use
> existing elements / attributes in order not to delay the next release.  We
> can take up the question of a "copyOf" element and the philosophical issues
> related to what a regularization "really" is later.
>
> --
> p.
>
> __________________________
> Perry Roland
> Music Library
> University of Virginia
> P. O. Box 400175
> Charlottesville, VA 22904
> 434-982-2702 (w)
> pdr4h (at) virginia (dot) edu
>
>
>
> From: mei-l-bounces at lists.uni-paderborn.de [
> mei-l-bounces at lists.uni-paderborn.de] on behalf of Raffaele Viglianti [
> raffaeleviglianti at gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2011 6:58 AM
> To: Music Encoding Initiative
> Subject: Re: [MEI-L] Colla parte
>
>
> Dear Joachim and all,
>
>
> Having had the opportunity to look at other parts of der Freischuetz
> manuscript, I think one might look at this situation in another way: the
> symbols  // or .//., etc. actually indicate to look back at the previous
> measure.
> Also in the case that described, I am inclined to think that // actually
> means a repetition of the instruction col basso to be found in the previous
> measure.
>
>
> Given this interpretation, it is sufficient to define what "col Basso"
> does, and the repetition symbols will just copy over the same meaning.
> Basically, if col Basso in this context means "play the current measure at
> the Basso staff" (which is different from "play the measure with
> xml:id='foo'"), the same meaning will be repeated by // in the following
> measure.
>
>
> To define what col Basso does, an element like the one suggested by Perry
> might be useful. Perhaps <colla target="#STAFFid">col Basso</colla> or
> similar.
>
>
> Regarding <supplied>, I think we need to clarify better its role and align
> it with TEI as much as possible. Perry's use seems a bit incorrect to me,
> because the element should be used to supply text that cannot be read or is
> not there at all and should be. In this case the symbol is there, the editor
> makes its meaning explicit. An element like <colla> that would somehow
> include the objections of the people at the back of the room, might be
> sufficient to make explicit the meaning of the symbol in question.
>
>
> Using sic / corr or orig / reg or abbr / expan seems a bit odd to me as
> well, because it's not a matter of replacing one (or many) symbol(s) with
> another (or many others) for the purpose of correcting, regularizing or
> expanding, but it's a matter of making more explicit the meaning of a
> less-standard sign.
>
>
> Hope this helps!
>
>
> Raffaele
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 11:58 PM, Roland, Perry (pdr4h) <
> pdr4h at eservices.virginia.edu> wrote:
>
> Hi Joachim,
>
> Let me re-state the issue to see if I understand it correctly --
>
> 1. Weber (is there any other composer worth talking about?) draws some
> version of a slash-symbol-thing to indicate that the current measure should
> be filled in with material from another instrument.
>
> 2. You want to record the original version (with the slash symbol) and give
> its "expansion" (as it were)?
>
> First, are you sure this problem can't be resolved using <orig> and
> <supplied> (or perhaps <reg>)?  For example, each measure of the flute part
> might be encoded --
>
> <measure>
>  <staff n="1">
>   <layer>
>     <choice>
>       <orig> <!-- some repetition sign(s) here --> </orig>
>       <supplied> <!-- a copy of the content of the vln. part -->
> </supplied>
>     </choice>
>   </layer>
>  </staff>
> <dir staff="1" tstamp="1">colla parte ...</dir>
> <!-- instead of the words there might be a <line> -->
> </measure>
>
> This seems like a good solution to me because it is explict.
>
> I'm using <supplied> because the actual substitution doesn't take place in
> the score, there's only an indication that it "ought" to happen. Actually
> making it happen is up to the editor -- the human being, not the software.
>
> Of course, what's missing is a link between the <supplied> element and the
> words "colla ..." (or a "wiggly" line), which I presume is in the flute
> part). At present, the editorial intervention can only be explained in the
> editorialDecl.  But, if we put our heads together, we might be able to think
> of another method of linking these.  (Perhaps with an <annotation>, which
> has pointers to the "participants"; that is, the <supplied> and <dir>
> elements, and a type attribute value of "collaparte"?)
>
> I don't know if you remember, but MEI originally had a different definition
> for <mRpt>.  It didn't necessarily indicate the repetition of the preceding
> measure, but rather the repetition *of any other measure*, "repetition"
> being defined somewhat loosely, of course.  This definition went the way of
> the dodo bird when the editorial elements (add, del, orig, reg, etc.) were
> added since the attribute (don't remember what it was called off the top of
> my head) pointing to the source measure duplicated these editorial elements'
> function.
>
> However, I recognize that there's currently no good way of implementing a
> reference to content given elsewhere in the document.  So, perhaps we should
> consider adding such a specialized element.  In the example above, the
> content of <supplied> would be the <colla> (or some such name) element.
>
> <measure n="1">
>  <staff>
>   <layer>
>     <choice>
>       <orig> <!-- some repetition sign(s) here --> </orig>
>       <supplied> <colla/> </supplied>
>     </choice>
>   </layer>
>  </staff>
> </measure>
>
> Of course, it would need an attribute pointing to the content of the vln.
> part.  In a way, this element would be similar to <ref>, although  <ref> is
> intended for navigation, while <colla> indicates "go get the content and put
> it here."  This is also not unlike internal parsed entities. This element
> would also need to be related to the <dir> or <line> elements. We could
> think about using its generic corresp attribute or give it a new,
> specialized attribute.
>
> (I can already hear some noises in the back of the room about some
> attribute or attributes for describing whatever transformation must be
> applied to the source, such as "transposed up a 5th", "inverted and
> retrograde", etc.  I'm not ready to go there yet!  There be dragons!)
>
> It might also need a more generic name than "colla".  Then it could be used
> for other situations where content given in one location needs to be
> referenced in some other.  Can't think of a good name off the top of my
> head, too late in the day.
>
> Just in case someone asks, I don't think XInclude can point to a location
> in the current document.
>
> Enough to think about for the weekend?  :)
>
> --
> p.
>
> __________________________
> Perry Roland
> Music Library
> University of Virginia
> P. O. Box 400175
> Charlottesville, VA 22904
> 434-982-2702 (w)
> pdr4h (at) virginia (dot) edu
> ________________________________________
> From: mei-l-bounces at lists.uni-paderborn.de [
> mei-l-bounces at lists.uni-paderborn.de] on behalf of Joachim Veit [
> veit at weber-gesamtausgabe.de]
> Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 3:43 PM
> To: mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de
> Subject: [MEI-L] Colla parte
>
>
> Dear MEI-L-Readers,
>
> when encoding manuscripts MEI has the possibility to encode
> measure-repeats or half-measure-repeats which are found in the original
> manuscripts in a form similar to: // or .//.  (two strokes through the
> barlines or something similar) with <mrpt> or <halfmrpt>. This has
> always a clear reference to the bar (or half-bar) before.
>
> The same symbols are used in manuscripts in combination with the "col
> Basso" or other "colla-parte"-instructions.
> Again in Weber's Freischuetz-Overture (we never do something other...)
> we have a contrabbasso with <staff n="16"> and above this the
> violoncello with <staff n="15>. Weber notates the contrabbasso in a
> normal way and in the cello-staff we find only "c. B." (= bar 1) and
> afterwards //   //    // etc.
> For a modern edition we could label the layer of the contrabbasso with
> an xml:id="2011" and put in the layer of staff 15: <layer n="1"
> copyof="2011"/>.
>
> But in this case we want to encode the "original" situation! So we first
> have to define in the scoredef:
> <scoredef>....
> <symboltable>
> <symboldef xml:id="symCollaParte"/> <!-- here we describe the symbol(s)
> Weber and others use in this case -->
> </symboltable>
> </scoredef>
>
> and within our staff 15:
> <staff n="15">
> <layer n="1">
> <symbol ref="symCollaParte"/>
> </layer>
> </staff>
> In this case the reference is not always clear: it might go to the staff
> below (as in this case) or the staff above (if the cello is written out
> and the cb-staff is pointing to the cello) or even from a flute to the
> first violin 5 systems below. So there should be some mechanism to make
> clear where the model is situated. And second: We should have the
> possibility to use "c. B." (or something similar) as a symbol-phrase
> (which at the same time "defines" the model) and for the following bars
> simply use "//" (or something similar) (maybe even one symbol for 2-3
> bars together??).
> Is this case already considered in the future guidelines?
>
> Best greetings and a happy weekend,
> Joachim
>
> _______________________________________________
> mei-l mailing list
> mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de
> https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l
> _______________________________________________
> mei-l mailing list
> mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de
> https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.uni-paderborn.de/pipermail/mei-l/attachments/20110903/fa1e62d6/attachment.html>