[MEI-L] analysis

[Johannes Kepper]

Hi both,

I would argue that for consistency's sake we should add @hfunc to chords. If one does his analysis using this attribute on notes, why should he switch to <harm> on chords?

jo


Am 23.04.2012 um 21:11 schrieb Roland, Perry (pdr4h):

> Hi, Maja,
>  
> We could add @hfunc to <chord>, but I've always thought that it would duplicate the function of <harm>, which is to assign harmonic labels.  I could be wrong though, if <harm> were defined only to be used for transcription and not analysis.  Anyone else have thoughts on this? 
>  
> --
> 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 Maja Hartwig [maja.hartwig at gmx.de]
> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 3:33 AM
> To: Music Encoding Initiative
> Subject: [MEI-L] analysis
> 
> Dear List,
> 
> writing the guidelines of the analysis module, I am wondering about the use of the @hfunc.
> It is allowed within a <note> for describing a note as a "keynote" or "root" or anything else.
> But the @hfunc is not permitted wtihin the <chord>, although the @mfunc e.g. is allowed.
> In my opinion it would make sense to use the @hfunc also on chords for describing the function of it 
> in a musical work, such as a "tonic" or something like that. 
> So I think the att.chord.anl should be memberOf att.harmonicfunction.
> Is it a bug or any other opinions?
> 
> Best regards,
> Maja
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mei-l mailing list
> mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de
> https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l