[MEI-L] Grouping of <app>s

[Roland, Perry (pdr4h)]

Hi Zoltan,

You're probably right that there is no meaning in creating overlapping groups, but I've often found that when I thought there could never be a good reason for something, an example of just such a thing arose later.  "There are more things in Heaven and Earth ..."  :)  So, I believe the best policy is to allow a wide range of practice until it causes a problem.

Best wishes for a happy and prosperous new year,

--
p.



From: mei-l [mailto:mei-l-bounces at lists.uni-paderborn.de] On Behalf Of Komíves Zoltán
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2014 6:43 AM
To: Music Encoding Initiative
Subject: [MEI-L] Grouping of <app>s

Hello All and Happy New Year,

There's been a discussion about how to group together <app> elements in the past (http://list-archives.org/2012/07/15/mei-l-lists-uni-paderborn-de/more-precise-app-s/f/7456812281 and http://list-archives.org/2012/07/23/mei-l-lists-uni-paderborn-de/antw-more-precise-app-s/f/3141983676) and I'd like to follow up a bit on the topic. I understand there's been a number of suggestions, one of the last ones being:

<app xml:id="a1"/>
<app xml:id="a2"/>
<annot plist="#a1 #a2" type="appGrp"/>

This seems a very suitable solution to the problem, but here's my question. With this practice it's possible to define overlapping groupings:

<app xml:id="a1"/>
<app xml:id="a2"/>
<app xml:id="a3"/>
<annot plist="#a1 #a2" type="appGrp"/>
<annot plist="#a2 #a3" type="appGrp"/>

I might be shortsighted, but I cannot think of a much meaningful use case for this scenario. Do you think such encoding should be forbidden/discouraged? Or perhaps someone can pinpoint a meaningful use case?

Thanks
Zoltan


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.uni-paderborn.de/pipermail/mei-l/attachments/20140106/207f1b91/attachment.html>