[MEI-L] dots on chords and rests

[Roland, Perry D. (pdr4h)]

The lack of <dot> within <rest> is an oversight that can be easily remedied.  It will be there in the next release.

<dot> within <chord>, however, is a completely different problem.  It seems to me that chords are never dotted, only the notes within them.  It is true that @dots is allowed on <chord>, but it was placed there as a convenience.  However, one cannot extrapolate from its existence the need to allow <dot> within <chord>.  As Jo has already noted, allowing <dot> within <chord> introduces unnecessary complexity and ambiguity, so I advise against that approach.

I’m not trying to re-ignite the recent discussion re: so-called “invisible accidentals” and its focus on redundancy, but since the following encoding

<chord dur=”2” dots=”1”>
  <note />
  <note />
  <note />
</chord>

is short hand for

<chord>
  <note dur=”2” dots=”1” />
  <note dur=”2” dots=”1” />
  <note dur=”2” dots=”1” />
</chord>

and because these attributes are all optional, then there’s nothing inherently wrong with

<chord dur=”2” dots=”1”>
  <note dur=”2” dots=”1” />
  <note dur=”2” dots=”1” />
  <note dur=”2” dots=”1” />
</chord>

The @dur and @dots attributes on <chord> are redundant, but allow the kind of “one stop” rhythmic query Jo is seeking.

Similarly, there is nothing wrong with the following:

<chord dur=”2” dots=”1”>
  <note dur=”2” dots=”1”>
    <dot /> <!—points to SVG shape -->
  </note>
  <note dur=”2” dots=”1”>
    <dot /> <!—points to SVG shape -->
  </note>
  <note dur=”2” dots=”1”>
    <dot /> <!—points to SVG shape -->
  </note>
</chord>

Again, there is redundancy between the @dots attribute on <note> and the <dot> element, but they serve different purposes -- @dots exists in the logical domain and <dot> exists in the visual one.  The <dot> element is providing additional information not communicated by the @dots attribute, not supplanting it.

It’s often difficult to draw a bright line between the logical and visual domains.  As a general rule, however, when there is only one “source of information”, such as note/@dots, then it functions in both domains.  The addition of another “source”, such as note/dot, separates the domains.  In other words, the visual domain can often be surmised from the logical, but making it explicit requires extra information; that is, usually elements.  (BTW, the gestural domain can also be inferred from the logical/visual, but making it explicit also requires additional information, usually attributes.)

<dot> is permitted inside <layer> in order to capture the ambiguous nature of dots in the mensural repertoire and probably should be disallowed by the CMN customization.  Using layer/dot in this case would be abuse in my opinion.

--
p.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.uni-paderborn.de/pipermail/mei-l/attachments/20151014/2480f9e9/attachment.html>