On Wednesday 30 July 2003 01:35, Silvan wrote:
> On Monday 28 July 2003 08:24 am, Chris Cannam wrote:
> > Richard Bown wrote:
> > > Can you or someone add these to the 1.0_release.txt then please?
> > Ingenious suggestion.
> I've been thinking about that for awhile... What do you have in mind
> for that class of performance directions (segnos, codas, etc.)? It
> seems to me that making them actually work would be ugly to say the
Yes, it's a surprisingly difficult problem even for the simple repeats.
I think the only thing we can rely on doing without confusion is to=20
default to showing repeats on barlines that end segments that are set=20
as repeating. I'm not sure whether we can even reliably do the reverse=20
(that is, mark a segment as repeating in the main view if someone sets=20
a repeating barline at the end of it). We possibly can, but there=20
still various problems with both of these: for example, the only way to=20
have a repeating segment without playing the repeat is to place another=20
segment immediately after it, and that gives you no way to quickly=20
switch repeats on and off.
=46rom the notation point of view, it almost makes more sense to store=20
repeats and segnos/codas/1-2-endings globally like time signature=20
changes, rather than in individual segments. Possibly. I don't much=20
like that though for other reasons (introducing a global "control flow"=20
mechanism is a complicated enough idea without then artificially=20
limiting it by basing it on what happens to work well in classical=20
> I was thinking you might decide to implement static events
> that show up as window dressing, but which don't actually alter
> playback. That seems wrong, yet pragmatic.
I think for segno at least we should certainly do that first.
The other thing I mentally place in the same category as these is=20
bracketed/joined staffs (e.g. for piano etc). Again, these are things=20
that suggest something about the structure of your track/instrument=20
arrangement besides just graphics.