[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GOP2-3 - GLISS or not
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: GOP2-3 - GLISS or not |
Date: |
Sat, 28 Jul 2012 07:18:00 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1.50 (gnu/linux) |
Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> writes:
>> This is kind of the nub of the issue. I agree that the notation for
>> staff pitches (and octaves) is going to remain stable -- but I'm
>> _not_ convinced that you can guarantee stability for accidentals or
>> durations.
>
> At least for German, the current syntax is the only good one IMHO,
> both for accidentals (for the twelve tones of an octave
You mean the 35 tones. After all, we are talking printed output and not
Midi.
--
David Kastrup
- Re: GOP2-3 - GLISS or not, (continued)
- Re: GOP2-3 - GLISS or not, Joseph Rushton Wakeling, 2012/07/26
- Re: GOP2-3 - GLISS or not, David Kastrup, 2012/07/26
- Re: GOP2-3 - GLISS or not, Joseph Rushton Wakeling, 2012/07/26
- Re: GOP2-3 - GLISS or not, Graham Percival, 2012/07/26
- Re: GOP2-3 - GLISS or not, Joseph Rushton Wakeling, 2012/07/27
- Re: GOP2-3 - GLISS or not, Graham Percival, 2012/07/27
- Re: GOP2-3 - GLISS or not, Joseph Rushton Wakeling, 2012/07/27
- Re: GOP2-3 - GLISS or not, Werner LEMBERG, 2012/07/28
- Re: GOP2-3 - GLISS or not,
David Kastrup <=
- Re: GOP2-3 - GLISS or not, Werner LEMBERG, 2012/07/28
- Re: GOP2-3 - GLISS or not, David Kastrup, 2012/07/28
- Re: GOP2-3 - GLISS or not, Werner LEMBERG, 2012/07/28
Re: GOP2-3 - GLISS or not, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2012/07/27