RE: Fret Diagram markup

[Heikki Johannes Junes]

> I suppose I'm also a bit hesitant to move away from explicit string
> definition because it seems to me to be more likely to be confusing.
> For example, if we finger the c major scale you've identified above, we
> might get something like:
> 
> ";3-3;0 2-2 3-3;0 2-2;0 1-1;;"
> 
> Which to me is more confusing than
> 
> "5-3-3;4-o;4-2-2;4-3-3;3-o;3-2-2;2-o;2-1-1;"

> Thanks again for your input.  How do we go about resolving differences
> of opinion on syntax?
> 
> Carl
> 

I agree that the that it is good the maintain the information about the strings.
So, that part is resolved ;)

As usual, I should be more precise on what was confusing me (before starting to
inventing something optional). In LilyPond the note properties are postfixed,
and the order of the postfixed syntax snippets does not matter. The example
above is otherwise well expressed -- it contains all the information needed, but
the order of the '-3' parts in '5-3-3' does matter, which is confusing. On the
other hand, if '5-3-3' would be written as in TabStaff Context, 'd\5-3', there
would not be such confusion. As well, if the '5-3-3' string above would be
'3\5-3', then it would be exactly in line with the syntax in TabStaff Context. 

I would be happy =), if the syntax for Tablatures and FretDiagrams would match
exactly. The syntax in TabStaff is already rather good, therefore, it could be
used in FretDiagram. (Sorry about giving a bad link to the syntax which did not
contain strings in the previous mail. I should have given
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.3/Documentation/user/out-www/lilypond/Tablatures-basic.html.)

> I can see some possibilities with this syntax, but it would require a
> major overhaul of the string parser, which is something that it seems
> Han-Wen doesn't really want to pursue.  It appears to me that he would
> prefer that we move into a FretDiagram context.  I'm a bit torn as to
> whether it's worth it to refine the "string" interface for the fret
> diagram.

If the string syntax above will be obsolete at some point, then also our
differences in opinions do not matter anymore. As an anecdote I could say that
"We should hurry to disagree -- our discussion will soon become obsolete!"

> BTW, how would one indicate the open string as part of the scale here in
> a fret diagram?  Would there be both an "O" above the string and a one
> (or two) numbered fret circles on it?  I don't believe I've ever seen
> such a diagram.

Exactly. Isn't it a brilliant way to show scales! (there is no other way)
However, I've seen scales in which open string have not been used at all -- the
tones sound more similar if there are no open strings.

  Heikki Junes