Open craigsapp opened 6 years ago
If they are an augmentation dot, then probably adding P or p is best, and maybe :: would indicate an explicit dot of division I agree, if the manuscript includes the dot I would add it explicitly
Rhythmic augmentation dots could be encoded as note@dots as currently, but they would not be displayed. But probably better to encode them as note@dots.ges. See issue rism-ch/verovio#757 related to this (note@dots.ges are not yet implemented). I agree, even though note@dots.ges are not yet implemented, I would use them
It is probably better to encode
:
characters as<dot>
in MEI conversions. Example:**mens
data:If they are an augmentation dot, then probably adding
P
orp
is best, and maybe::
would indicate an explicit dot of division (to be decided later). Rhythmic augmentation dots could be encoded asnote@dots
as currently, but they would not be displayed. But probably better to encode them asnote@dots.ges
. See issue https://github.com/rism-ch/verovio/issues/757 related to this (note@dots.ges
are not yet implemented).If in circle mensuration, then the first dot above would function like an augmentation dot, and the second like a dot of division. So an explicit expression of the rhythm might be:
The
p
would force a visual dot when converting to modern notation, and thei
would suppress the dot in conversion to modern notation.A problem is that the meaning of the dots depends on the mensuration. If the mensuration is changed, an augmentation dot might become a dot of division and vice-versa.
MEI conversion (
develop-humdrum
branch):