[MEI-L] Coordinate system confusion [and terminology]

Klaus Rettinghaus klaus.rettinghaus at gmail.com
Sun Jul 9 17:15:07 CEST 2017


I strongly recommend to stick with virtual unit! Talking about space 
could lead to the assumption that it's about the space _between_ two 
lines. But as a line by itself has a defined width, a space would 
merely be "the space between two adjacent staff lines plus the width of 
one staff line, which is confusing.

The Guidelines are already very precise about that:
"A single vu is half the distance between the vertical center point of 
a staff line and that of an adjacent staff line."

And after all, a "vu" isn't just about musical context, i.e. "things" 
on or around a staff,  but a real (relative) measurement unit for the 
whole layout.

--
Klaus


Am Sa, 8. Jul, 2017 um 9:55 schrieb Roland, Perry D. (pdr4h) 
<pdr4h at eservices.virginia.edu>:
> 
> If there's support from the community, I'm fine with changing "vu" to 
> "hs".  If we're going to break it, let's break it now.
> In the schema and Guidelines, it's a simple search-and-replace. 
> Changes to existing markup can be built into the version 3 to version 
> 4 XSLT.  But I can't speak to changes to Verovio and other MEI-based 
> software, so if there are objections from developers, speak now 
> please.
> 
> --
> p.
> 
>>  -----Original Message-----
>>  From: mei-l [mailto:mei-l-bounces at lists.uni-paderborn.de] On Behalf 
>> Of Byrd, Donald A.
>>  Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2017 3:34 PM
>>  To: Music Encoding Initiative <mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de>
>>  Subject: Re: [MEI-L] Coordinate system confusion [and terminology]
>> 
>>  I understand the issue. But I think just saying 
>> "half-STEPS/diatonic steps" instead of "half-
>>  spaces/diatonic steps" and half-spaces (hs for short) instead of 
>> virtual units (vu for short)
>>  would do the job. No need to change the unit, just the term.
>> 
>>  Thanks for listening! I'll shut up now.
>> 
>>  --DAB
>> 
>> 
>>  On Jul 8, 2017, at 3:12 PM, "Roland, Perry D. (pdr4h)" 
>> <pdr4h at eservices.virginia.edu>
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>  >
>>  > Don,
>>  >
>>  > Like I said before, changing MEI's unit of measurement from 
>> half-spaces/diatonic steps
>>  to spaces would break all existing markup and software.  Changing 
>> the markup is
>>  reasonably easy, but modifying software is another problem all 
>> together.  So, unless there's
>>  a HUGE outcry from the community, I'd prefer to leave things as 
>> they are.
>>  >
>>  > --
>>  > p.
>>  >
>>  >
>>  >> -----Original Message-----
>>  >> From: mei-l [mailto:mei-l-bounces at lists.uni-paderborn.de] On 
>> Behalf Of Byrd, Donald
>>  A.
>>  >> Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2017 2:48 PM
>>  >> To: Music Encoding Initiative <mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de>
>>  >> Subject: Re: [MEI-L] Coordinate system confusion [and 
>> terminology]
>>  >>
>>  >> Before my original suggestion is completely forgotten, I'd like 
>> to
>>  >> back up a little. Perry, you said
>>  >>>
>>  >>> I have trouble, as I think most folks would, with values like 
>> "2-1/2
>>  >>> half-spaces". I can
>>  >> live with "2-1/2 steps", but still prefer "2-1/2 vu".  We 
>> can/should
>>  >> define a "vu" in relation to diatonic steps though.
>>  >>
>>  >> Gould and Read  rarely if ever saying anything like "2-1/2
>>  >> half-spaces"; the example I gave, and what they actually say, is 
>> "2-1/2 SPACES".  And
>>  the fact the "spaces"
>>  >> terminology is used consistently by both in works intended for
>>  >> practical use seems like pretty good evidence that that 
>> terminology doesn't bother
>>  people much.
>>  >>
>>  >> Let's see, here's a random note in a random piece of music; I 
>> wonder how long its stem
>>  is?
>>  >> Ah, it extends all the way across three spaces and halfway across
>>  >> another! :-). It's a standard one-octave stem, with a length of 
>> 3 and 1/2 spaces.
>>  >>
>>  >> --Don
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >> On Jul 7, 2017, at 4:41 PM, "Roland, Perry D. (pdr4h)"
>>  >> <pdr4h at eservices.virginia.edu>
>>  >> wrote:
>>  >>
>>  >>> Yes, 1 vu = 1 diatonic step.  However, the phrase “diatonic 
>> step”
>>  >>> doesn’t actually appear in the definition –
>>  >>>
>>  >>> “A single vu is half the distance between the vertical center 
>> point
>>  >>> of a staff line and that
>>  >> of an adjacent staff line.”
>>  >>>
>>  >>> Even this definition occurs within the description of 
>> @vu.height.
>>  >>> This is definitely a
>>  >> place where the Guidelines could use some work.
>>  >>>
>>  >>> --
>>  >>> p.
>>  >>>
>>  >>>
>>  >>> From: mei-l [mailto:mei-l-bounces at lists.uni-paderborn.de] On 
>> Behalf
>>  >>> Of Craig Sapp
>>  >>> Sent: Friday, July 07, 2017 2:58 PM
>>  >>> To: Music Encoding Initiative <mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de>
>>  >>> Subject: Re: [MEI-L] Coordinate system confusion [and 
>> terminology]
>>  >>>
>>  >>>> We can/should define a "vu" in relation to diatonic steps 
>> though.
>>  >>>
>>  >>> Is that not already the case? Otherwise, I am confused...  In 
>> other
>>  >>> words 1vu = 1 diatonic
>>  >> step (such as E to F, or G-flat to A-sharp since the chromatic 
>> alteration does not
>>  matter).
>>  >>>
>>  >>>
>>  >>>
>>  >>> On 7 July 2017 at 20:45, Roland, Perry D. (pdr4h)
>>  >>> <pdr4h at eservices.virginia.edu>
>>  >> wrote:
>>  >>>
>>  >>> I have trouble, as I think most folks would, with values like 
>> "2-1/2
>>  >>> half-spaces". I can
>>  >> live with "2-1/2 steps", but still prefer "2-1/2 vu".  We 
>> can/should
>>  >> define a "vu" in relation to diatonic steps though.
>>  >>>
>>  >>> --
>>  >>> p.
>>  >>>
>>  >>>
>>  >>>> -----Original Message-----
>>  >>>> From: mei-l [mailto:mei-l-bounces at lists.uni-paderborn.de] On 
>> Behalf
>>  >>>> Of Byrd,
>>  >> Donald A.
>>  >>>> Sent: Friday, July 07, 2017 11:23 AM
>>  >>>> To: Music Encoding Initiative <mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de>
>>  >>>> Subject: Re: [MEI-L] Coordinate system confusion [and 
>> terminology]
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>> Sure. As I said, both Gould and Ross talk about "half spaces".
>>  >>>> --DAB
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>> On Jul 7, 2017, at 11:03 AM, "Roland, Perry D. (pdr4h)"
>>  >>>> <pdr4h at eservices.virginia.edu>
>>  >>>> wrote:
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>>
>>  >>>>> Hi Don,
>>  >>>>>
>>  >>>>> You make a good argument for the term "staff-space" or 
>> "space".
>>  >>>>> However, MEI doesn't
>>  >>>> use this distance as its unit of measurement. Instead, MEI uses
>>  >>>> *half the distance* between adjacent staff lines, hence the 
>> need
>>  >>>> for a different term.  Perhaps "interline distance" and 
>> "virtual
>>  >>>> unit" aren't intuitive, but they
>>  >> accurately describe the situation, which "staff-space"
>>  >>>> or "space" do not.  Of course, we could start using the entire
>>  >>>> distance between staff lines as the unit, but that would mean
>>  >>>> changing all existing MEI
>>  >> markup and software.
>>  >>>>>
>>  >>>>> --
>>  >>>>> p.
>>  >>>>>
>>  >>>>>
>>  >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>  >>>>>> From: mei-l [mailto:mei-l-bounces at lists.uni-paderborn.de] On
>>  >>>>>> Behalf Of Byrd, Donald
>>  >>>> A.
>>  >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2017 11:26 AM
>>  >>>>>> To: Music Encoding Initiative <mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de>
>>  >>>>>> Subject: Re: [MEI-L] Coordinate system confusion [and
>>  >>>>>> terminology]
>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>>> This reminds me of another source of coordinate system 
>> confusion,
>>  >>>>>> namely the term for the distance between staff lines. Verovio
>>  >>>>>> source code calls it a "double unit", and half that distance 
>> a
>>  >>>>>> "virtual unit" or "VU" or just
>>  >>>> "unit"; none of those terms is at all intuitive.
>>  >>>>>> Johannes calls it the "interline distance", which is much 
>> better,
>>  >>>>>> but rather long, and "half interline distance" is way too 
>> long
>>  >>>>>> (and clumsy). Well, look at Chapter 1 of _Behind Bars_. Her 
>> term
>>  >>>>>> is "stave-space", or just "space" for short; half that 
>> distance,
>>  >>>>>> of course, is a "half space". Ross' _Art of Music Engraving 
>> and
>>  >>>>>> Processing_, the only other book I know of that says much on 
>> the
>>  >>>>>> subject, just uses the
>>  >>>> term "space'. So, for example, both might describe a certain 
>> stem
>>  >>>> length as "2-1/2
>>  >> spaces".
>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>>> I submit "stave-space" (or "staff-space" on my side of the
>>  >>>>>> Puddle) as the full term and "space" for short are both the 
>> most
>>  >>>>>> standard and the
>>  >> best terms.
>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>>> --Don
>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>>> On Jul 4, 2017, at 11:16 AM, Daniel Alles
>>  >>>>>> <DanielAlles at stud.uni-frankfurt.de>
>>  >>>>>> wrote:
>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>> Thank you, Johannes, that really helped and made that 
>> clear. So
>>  >>>>>>> I can continue using the
>>  >>>>>> Edirom-coordinates for ulx etc.
>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>> Zitat von Johannes Kepper <kepper at edirom.de>:
>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>>> Dear Daniel,
>>  >>>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>>> that's a real confusion, and we need to make it clearer in 
>> the
>>  >>>>>>>> guidelines. *Pixel* coordinates are always with the origin 
>> in
>>  >>>>>>>> the top left corner. *Music* coordinates, however, are 
>> always
>>  >>>>>>>> bottom up. @ulx and so on are always in pixel units, but 
>> @vo
>>  >>>>>>>> (vertical
>>  >>>>>>>> offset) is specified in interline distances (half the 
>> distance
>>  >>>>>>>> between two staff lines, or, in other words, the vertical
>>  >>>>>>>> distance between a C4 and a D4, or any other two adjacent
>>  >>>>>>>> notes). If you want to specify that a dynamic is written 
>> above
>>  >>>>>>>> its default position, it seems more natural that values go 
>> up (i.e., @vo="3").
>>  >>>>>>>> This means that for musical units the origin has to be 
>> bottom left.
>>  >>>>>>>> I know it's confusing in the guidelines, and we will 
>> address
>>  >>>>>>>> this at some point. If you don't mind, you're invited to
>>  >>>>>>>> prepare something on Git and submit a pull request ;-)
>>  >>>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>>> Hope this helps,
>>  >>>>>>>> jo
>>  >>>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>>>> Am 04.07.2017 um 14:48 schrieb Daniel Alles
>>  >>>>>>>>> <DanielAlles at stud.uni-
>>  >>>> frankfurt.de>:
>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>>>> Dear all,
>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>>>> at the moment, I am a little bit confused about how MEI
>>  >>>>>>>>> defines its coordinate
>>  >>>> system:
>>  >>>>>> It is possible to add the attributes @ulx, @uly, @lrx and 
>> @lry to
>>  >>>>>> for example a surface, as written in part 12 of the 
>> Guidelines,
>>  >>>>>> which places the origin of the coordinate system in the upper
>>  >>>>>> left corner. All the examples in
>>  >>>> that part show that behavior, ulx/uly is always 0/0.
>>  >>>>>> This would correspond to the coordinate systems used in SVG 
>> and
>>  >>>>>> DOM and (which is what I use for my work) Edirom Editor. On 
>> the
>>  >>>>>> other hand it is written in part 22.3, that MEI uses a 
>> coordinate
>>  >>>>>> system in which "the y-axis points from bottom up". That 
>> would
>>  >>>>>> mean, that ulx/uly could never
>>  >>>> be 0/0.
>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>>>> So now my questions: Is it sufficient to use the 
>> coordinates
>>  >>>>>>>>> like in the examples, with
>>  >>>>>> the origin in the upper left corner? Would that "override" 
>> MEIs
>>  >>>>>> original coordinate
>>  >>>> system?
>>  >>>>>> If not: Isn't the possibility to encode areas from top-left 
>> to
>>  >>>>>> bottom-right corners a semantic error in MEI, if the 
>> coordinate
>>  >>>>>> system is pointing from
>>  >>>> bottom-left to top-right?
>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>>>> Best,
>>  >>>>>>>>> Daniel
>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>>>
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>
>>  >>>>
>>  >>> _______________________________________________
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >>
>>  >> _______________________________________________
>>  >> 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
>> 
>>  ---
>>  Donald Byrd
>>  Woodrow Wilson Indiana Teaching Fellow
>>  Adjunct Associate Professor of Informatics Visiting Scientist, 
>> Research Technologies
>>  Indiana University Bloomington
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  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




More information about the mei-l mailing list