question on musicNotation

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

question on musicNotation

Torsten Schassan-2
Dear colleagues,

does anyone of you have (private) thoughts about how to improve the
documentation (i.e. tagging) of musical notation?


Right now we have:

- musicNotation, which is member of modul.physDescPart and thus
descendant of modul.msdescription

- notatedMusic, which I considered to be a element to be used in
transcriptions as member of model.globel but could -surprisingly- appear
within <musicNotation> though


In order to *describe* what kind of musical notation can be found I
would rather elaborate on <musicNotation> instead of using notatedMusic
within it. Opinions?

In analogy to <stamp>, <watermark>, or <seal> I would think of new
elements like <staff> and <clef> to describe what's there. Surely <term>
would do the trick as well but would be less specific.

In order to classify the notated music I would like to see @type defined
for <musicNotation>.

Considering the description in the Guidelines that "If a manuscript
employs more than one notation, they must both be described within the
same musicNotation element, for example as different list items." but
realising that different notations may share the structure of different
layouts or different forms of decoration, would it be feasible (though
not backwards compatible) to propose something like:

element musicNotationDesc
{ ...,
    ( model.pLike+ | ( summary?, musicNotation+ ) )
}


Best, Torsten


PS: BTW, ch. 14.3 lacks a space here: "notatedMusicprovides a way to
signal ..."


--
Torsten Schassan - Digitale Editionen, Abteilung Handschriften und
Sondersammlungen
Herzog August Bibliothek, Postfach 1364, D-38299 Wolfenbuettel, Tel.:
+49-5331-808-130 (Fax -165)
Handschriftendatenbank* http://diglib.hab.de/?db=mss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: question on musicNotation

Jack Bowers
Hi Torsten,

First I will start by saying I don't know how to encode what you're asking as that's not my field...

But if you haven't already heard of it, maybe the Music Encoding Initiative might be of interest to you http://music-encoding.org/

It is inspired by the TEI and they apparently share a lot of the same or similar features and XML structure but they aren't formally related. 

I would venture to say that you would likely be able to write a TEI ODD https://wiki.tei-c.org/index.php/ODD that could define a hybrid schema of the two systems to allow for the best of both worlds..

Best,
Jack

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Torsten Schassan <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear colleagues,

does anyone of you have (private) thoughts about how to improve the documentation (i.e. tagging) of musical notation?


Right now we have:

- musicNotation, which is member of modul.physDescPart and thus descendant of modul.msdescription

- notatedMusic, which I considered to be a element to be used in transcriptions as member of model.globel but could -surprisingly- appear within <musicNotation> though


In order to *describe* what kind of musical notation can be found I would rather elaborate on <musicNotation> instead of using notatedMusic within it. Opinions?

In analogy to <stamp>, <watermark>, or <seal> I would think of new elements like <staff> and <clef> to describe what's there. Surely <term> would do the trick as well but would be less specific.

In order to classify the notated music I would like to see @type defined for <musicNotation>.

Considering the description in the Guidelines that "If a manuscript employs more than one notation, they must both be described within the same musicNotation element, for example as different list items." but realising that different notations may share the structure of different layouts or different forms of decoration, would it be feasible (though not backwards compatible) to propose something like:

element musicNotationDesc
{ ...,
   ( model.pLike+ | ( summary?, musicNotation+ ) )
}


Best, Torsten


PS: BTW, ch. 14.3 lacks a space here: "notatedMusicprovides a way to signal ..."


--
Torsten Schassan - Digitale Editionen, Abteilung Handschriften und Sondersammlungen
Herzog August Bibliothek, Postfach 1364, D-38299 Wolfenbuettel, Tel.: <a href="tel:%2B49-5331-808-130" value="+495331808130" target="_blank">+49-5331-808-130 (Fax -165)
Handschriftendatenbank* http://diglib.hab.de/?db=mss

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: question on musicNotation

Torsten Schassan-2
Dear Jack,

surely I know the MEI and MEI people but MEI is rather about encoding
the music than describing the notation?

All I want to do is to allow for a description of

a) How many staff lines are there?
b) Are they coloured and how?
c) Are there clefs?
d) What type of notation is it?

For these questions MEI doesn't offer a solution on the description
level, if I know it well enough.

And the TEI only has <musciNotation>.

Best, Torsten


Am 31.05.2017 um 02:27 schrieb Jack Bowers:

> Hi Torsten,
>
> First I will start by saying I don't know how to encode what you're asking
> as that's not my field...
>
> But if you haven't already heard of it, maybe the Music Encoding Initiative
> might be of interest to you http://music-encoding.org/
>
> It is inspired by the TEI and they apparently share a lot of the same or
> similar features and XML structure but they aren't formally related.
>
> I would venture to say that you would likely be able to write a TEI ODD
> https://wiki.tei-c.org/index.php/ODD that could define a hybrid schema of
> the two systems to allow for the best of both worlds..
>
> Best,
> Jack
>
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Torsten Schassan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Dear colleagues,
>>
>> does anyone of you have (private) thoughts about how to improve the
>> documentation (i.e. tagging) of musical notation?
>>
>>
>> Right now we have:
>>
>> - musicNotation, which is member of modul.physDescPart and thus descendant
>> of modul.msdescription
>>
>> - notatedMusic, which I considered to be a element to be used in
>> transcriptions as member of model.globel but could -surprisingly- appear
>> within <musicNotation> though
>>
>>
>> In order to *describe* what kind of musical notation can be found I would
>> rather elaborate on <musicNotation> instead of using notatedMusic within
>> it. Opinions?
>>
>> In analogy to <stamp>, <watermark>, or <seal> I would think of new
>> elements like <staff> and <clef> to describe what's there. Surely <term>
>> would do the trick as well but would be less specific.
>>
>> In order to classify the notated music I would like to see @type defined
>> for <musicNotation>.
>>
>> Considering the description in the Guidelines that "If a manuscript
>> employs more than one notation, they must both be described within the same
>> musicNotation element, for example as different list items." but realising
>> that different notations may share the structure of different layouts or
>> different forms of decoration, would it be feasible (though not backwards
>> compatible) to propose something like:
>>
>> element musicNotationDesc
>> { ...,
>>     ( model.pLike+ | ( summary?, musicNotation+ ) )
>> }
>>
>>
>> Best, Torsten
>>
>>
>> PS: BTW, ch. 14.3 lacks a space here: "notatedMusicprovides a way to
>> signal ..."
>>
>>
>> --
>> Torsten Schassan - Digitale Editionen, Abteilung Handschriften und
>> Sondersammlungen
>> Herzog August Bibliothek, Postfach 1364, D-38299 Wolfenbuettel, Tel.:
>> +49-5331-808-130 (Fax -165)
>> Handschriftendatenbank* http://diglib.hab.de/?db=mss
>>
>


--
Torsten Schassan - Digitale Editionen, Abteilung Handschriften und
Sondersammlungen
Herzog August Bibliothek, Postfach 1364, D-38299 Wolfenbuettel, Tel.:
+49-5331-808-130 (Fax -165)
Handschriftendatenbank* http://diglib.hab.de/?db=mss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: question on musicNotation

Johannes Kepper
Hi Torsten,

it's a little bit hard to give better advice without seeing an example and knowing more about your needs, but obviously MEI is capable of doing what you described so far. A good starting point seems to be <staffDef> (http://music-encoding.org/documentation/3.0.0/staffDef/)

<staffDef lines="6" lines.color="black red black black green black" clef.line="3" clef.shape="C" notationtype="mensural.black"/>

should do most of the trick. You're right that this happens in the body of an MEI file, and not in the header, but sometimes the distinction between data and metadata seems a little bit artificial – I see no reason not to use this element to describe the music, especially in a TEI context when there is no encoding of the music itself…

Hope this helps,
Johannes


> Am 31.05.2017 um 10:02 schrieb Torsten Schassan <[hidden email]>:
>
> Dear Jack,
>
> surely I know the MEI and MEI people but MEI is rather about encoding the music than describing the notation?
>
> All I want to do is to allow for a description of
>
> a) How many staff lines are there?
> b) Are they coloured and how?
> c) Are there clefs?
> d) What type of notation is it?
>
> For these questions MEI doesn't offer a solution on the description level, if I know it well enough.
>
> And the TEI only has <musciNotation>.
>
> Best, Torsten
>
>
> Am 31.05.2017 um 02:27 schrieb Jack Bowers:
>> Hi Torsten,
>> First I will start by saying I don't know how to encode what you're asking
>> as that's not my field...
>> But if you haven't already heard of it, maybe the Music Encoding Initiative
>> might be of interest to you http://music-encoding.org/
>> It is inspired by the TEI and they apparently share a lot of the same or
>> similar features and XML structure but they aren't formally related.
>> I would venture to say that you would likely be able to write a TEI ODD
>> https://wiki.tei-c.org/index.php/ODD that could define a hybrid schema of
>> the two systems to allow for the best of both worlds..
>> Best,
>> Jack
>> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Torsten Schassan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>
>>> does anyone of you have (private) thoughts about how to improve the
>>> documentation (i.e. tagging) of musical notation?
>>>
>>>
>>> Right now we have:
>>>
>>> - musicNotation, which is member of modul.physDescPart and thus descendant
>>> of modul.msdescription
>>>
>>> - notatedMusic, which I considered to be a element to be used in
>>> transcriptions as member of model.globel but could -surprisingly- appear
>>> within <musicNotation> though
>>>
>>>
>>> In order to *describe* what kind of musical notation can be found I would
>>> rather elaborate on <musicNotation> instead of using notatedMusic within
>>> it. Opinions?
>>>
>>> In analogy to <stamp>, <watermark>, or <seal> I would think of new
>>> elements like <staff> and <clef> to describe what's there. Surely <term>
>>> would do the trick as well but would be less specific.
>>>
>>> In order to classify the notated music I would like to see @type defined
>>> for <musicNotation>.
>>>
>>> Considering the description in the Guidelines that "If a manuscript
>>> employs more than one notation, they must both be described within the same
>>> musicNotation element, for example as different list items." but realising
>>> that different notations may share the structure of different layouts or
>>> different forms of decoration, would it be feasible (though not backwards
>>> compatible) to propose something like:
>>>
>>> element musicNotationDesc
>>> { ...,
>>>    ( model.pLike+ | ( summary?, musicNotation+ ) )
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>> Best, Torsten
>>>
>>>
>>> PS: BTW, ch. 14.3 lacks a space here: "notatedMusicprovides a way to
>>> signal ..."
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Torsten Schassan - Digitale Editionen, Abteilung Handschriften und
>>> Sondersammlungen
>>> Herzog August Bibliothek, Postfach 1364, D-38299 Wolfenbuettel, Tel.:
>>> +49-5331-808-130 (Fax -165)
>>> Handschriftendatenbank* http://diglib.hab.de/?db=mss
>>>
>
>
> --
> Torsten Schassan - Digitale Editionen, Abteilung Handschriften und Sondersammlungen
> Herzog August Bibliothek, Postfach 1364, D-38299 Wolfenbuettel, Tel.: +49-5331-808-130 (Fax -165)
> Handschriftendatenbank* http://diglib.hab.de/?db=mss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: question on musicNotation

James Cummings-4
Hi all,

This was basically what I was going to suggest. Maybe the MEI-TEI
community would like to write an ODD which embeds the elements
like staffDef from MEI inside musicNotation?  I believe there was
one floating around that allows MEI inside notatedMusic (for
actual transcription of it in a TEI context).

-James


On 31/05/17 09:19, Johannes Kepper wrote:

> Hi Torsten,
>
> it's a little bit hard to give better advice without seeing an example and knowing more about your needs, but obviously MEI is capable of doing what you described so far. A good starting point seems to be <staffDef> (http://music-encoding.org/documentation/3.0.0/staffDef/)
>
> <staffDef lines="6" lines.color="black red black black green black" clef.line="3" clef.shape="C" notationtype="mensural.black"/>
>
> should do most of the trick. You're right that this happens in the body of an MEI file, and not in the header, but sometimes the distinction between data and metadata seems a little bit artificial – I see no reason not to use this element to describe the music, especially in a TEI context when there is no encoding of the music itself…
>
> Hope this helps,
> Johannes
>
>
>> Am 31.05.2017 um 10:02 schrieb Torsten Schassan <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> Dear Jack,
>>
>> surely I know the MEI and MEI people but MEI is rather about encoding the music than describing the notation?
>>
>> All I want to do is to allow for a description of
>>
>> a) How many staff lines are there?
>> b) Are they coloured and how?
>> c) Are there clefs?
>> d) What type of notation is it?
>>
>> For these questions MEI doesn't offer a solution on the description level, if I know it well enough.
>>
>> And the TEI only has <musciNotation>.
>>
>> Best, Torsten
>>
>>
>> Am 31.05.2017 um 02:27 schrieb Jack Bowers:
>>> Hi Torsten,
>>> First I will start by saying I don't know how to encode what you're asking
>>> as that's not my field...
>>> But if you haven't already heard of it, maybe the Music Encoding Initiative
>>> might be of interest to you http://music-encoding.org/
>>> It is inspired by the TEI and they apparently share a lot of the same or
>>> similar features and XML structure but they aren't formally related.
>>> I would venture to say that you would likely be able to write a TEI ODD
>>> https://wiki.tei-c.org/index.php/ODD that could define a hybrid schema of
>>> the two systems to allow for the best of both worlds..
>>> Best,
>>> Jack
>>> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Torsten Schassan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>>
>>>> does anyone of you have (private) thoughts about how to improve the
>>>> documentation (i.e. tagging) of musical notation?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Right now we have:
>>>>
>>>> - musicNotation, which is member of modul.physDescPart and thus descendant
>>>> of modul.msdescription
>>>>
>>>> - notatedMusic, which I considered to be a element to be used in
>>>> transcriptions as member of model.globel but could -surprisingly- appear
>>>> within <musicNotation> though
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In order to *describe* what kind of musical notation can be found I would
>>>> rather elaborate on <musicNotation> instead of using notatedMusic within
>>>> it. Opinions?
>>>>
>>>> In analogy to <stamp>, <watermark>, or <seal> I would think of new
>>>> elements like <staff> and <clef> to describe what's there. Surely <term>
>>>> would do the trick as well but would be less specific.
>>>>
>>>> In order to classify the notated music I would like to see @type defined
>>>> for <musicNotation>.
>>>>
>>>> Considering the description in the Guidelines that "If a manuscript
>>>> employs more than one notation, they must both be described within the same
>>>> musicNotation element, for example as different list items." but realising
>>>> that different notations may share the structure of different layouts or
>>>> different forms of decoration, would it be feasible (though not backwards
>>>> compatible) to propose something like:
>>>>
>>>> element musicNotationDesc
>>>> { ...,
>>>>     ( model.pLike+ | ( summary?, musicNotation+ ) )
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best, Torsten
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> PS: BTW, ch. 14.3 lacks a space here: "notatedMusicprovides a way to
>>>> signal ..."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Torsten Schassan - Digitale Editionen, Abteilung Handschriften und
>>>> Sondersammlungen
>>>> Herzog August Bibliothek, Postfach 1364, D-38299 Wolfenbuettel, Tel.:
>>>> +49-5331-808-130 (Fax -165)
>>>> Handschriftendatenbank* http://diglib.hab.de/?db=mss
>>>>
>>
>> --
>> Torsten Schassan - Digitale Editionen, Abteilung Handschriften und Sondersammlungen
>> Herzog August Bibliothek, Postfach 1364, D-38299 Wolfenbuettel, Tel.: +49-5331-808-130 (Fax -165)
>> Handschriftendatenbank* http://diglib.hab.de/?db=mss


--
Dr James Cummings, [hidden email]
Academic IT Services, University of Oxford
Loading...