[MEI-L] symbol/symbolDef

[Roland, Perry (pdr4h)]

Thomas,

> I see, so the module is meant for rendering purposes only.  Then
> <symbol> inside <symbolDef> is intended for "composite" symbols,
> right?  <curve> and <line> elements would obviously describe the
> strokes to create a symbol.  I think I can make up some examples for
> the guidelines.  But for defining decent symbols, <curve> and <line>
> seem pretty crude to me, especially because they can only describe
> lines and not filled areas.

Yes, the module is meant for rendering. And, yes, <symbol> inside <symbolDef> is for composite symbols.  

My intent was to provide basic MEI functionality *in the absence of* a special-purpose drawing language.  So, I would lean toward augmenting the MEI line, curve, and text graphic primitives (perhaps by adding an element for filled areas/paths) rather than replacing them.

However, it may be more advantageous to replace the content of <symbolDef> with SVG or define <symbolDef> as a placeholder whose content must be declared before it can be used.  The latter would permit the use of any drawing language (SVG, PostScript, etc.), but would have a detrimental effect on interoperability.

I'd like to hear from the "rendering team" (Laurent, Craig, Thomas) whether SVG is so widely-used and widely-accepted that we should import its elements here exclusively.  How important is it to allow other "markup", such as PostScript or other existing schemes?

--
p.

__________________________
Perry Roland
Music Library
University of Virginia
P. O. Box 400175
Charlottesville, VA 22904
434-982-2702 (w)
pdr4h (at) virginia (dot) edu