[MEI-L] analysis

[Roland, Perry (pdr4h)]

Given the current definition of hfunc one should not "do his analysis" of chords using the hfunc attribute.

The att.harmonicfunction class is for attributes describing the harmonic function *of a single pitch* in a chord.  It was intended for labels such as "root", "third", "fifth", etc.  This is why it's available on note but not on chord.

<classSpec ident="att.harmonicfunction" module="MEI.analysis" type="atts">
  <desc>Attributes describing the harmonic function of a single pitch</desc>
  <attList>
    <attDef ident="hfunc" usage="opt">
      <desc>describes harmonic function in any convenient typology.</desc>
      <datatype>
        <rng:data type="NMTOKEN"/>
      </datatype>
    </attDef>
  </attList>
</classSpec>

Chord labels, like "Cm7", or indications of harmonic functionality, like "ii7", belong in <harm>, unless we expand the definition of att.harmonicfunction and, in all likelihood, its datatype.

It seems to me that we need right now is better documentation in the Guidelines, not more changes to the schema.  We can consider this topic again at a later date.

--
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 Johannes Kepper [kepper at edirom.de]
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 4:30 PM
To: Music Encoding Initiative
Subject: Re: [MEI-L] analysis

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


_______________________________________________
mei-l mailing list
mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de
https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l