Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

On 24/07/2020 01:17, Aaron Hill wrote: On 2020-07-23 4:28 pm, Owen Lamb wrote: (It starts to get confusing to keep track of diagonal directions after a while, so for the sake of clarity, I'll be talking about diamonds with thick NE and SW sides as Calimaine, and those with thick NW and SE sid

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 9:00 PM Karlin High wrote: > The four-shape communities... I gather these folks would be more likely to > care If anyone wants more input on these questions, maybe a post on lilypond-user would be in order? There have been people from the four-shapes scene active there in

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 6:29 PM Owen Lamb wrote: > Aha! Apparently all the old issue conversations have been migrated to GitLab. The links and attachments work fine here: https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/issues/1060 Brilliant! I had clean missed how that's worked out. > This book being the

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

Hmm... Washida is already a Japanese surname, which might cause confusion. If you'd really like to dissociate your area from Florida, all I can offer is going further northwest: Alaskida or Floraska. But then to be consistent we'd have to take Hawaii into account, and it doesn't play well with such

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

On 2020-07-23 4:28 pm, Owen Lamb wrote: (It starts to get confusing to keep track of diagonal directions after a while, so for the sake of clarity, I'll be talking about diamonds with thick NE and SW sides as Calimaine, and those with thick NW and SE sides as Florington, after the states roughl

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

Aha! Apparently all the old issue conversations have been migrated to GitLab. The links and attachments work fine here: https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/issues/1060 (It starts to get confusing to keep track of diagonal directions after a while, so for the sake of clarity, I'll be talking abo

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 4:31 PM Owen Lamb wrote: > Firstly, none of the corpora (aha!) you provided or ones I found myself > seemed to present both mirrored versions of mi in the same document, as > Massive Lion claimed on the original Google Code archive should be the case > depending on stem dir

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

Wow! Thanks for all the sources--and the enlightening Latin discussion! I was able to find examples of the missing Funk and Walker do, re, and ti heads, so that's the most pressing issue done with. I'll begin writing the proposal for those ones, but I'll hold out sending it before we get the other

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

Jean Abou Samra writes: > Le 22/07/2020 à 03:32, Aaron Hill a écrit : > >> On 2020-07-21 5:39 pm, Owen Lamb wrote: >>> corpuses (corpori?) >> >> Off-topic: "corpora" is the plural in English.  Though while >> "corpuses" is not technically correct, I would have no problem >> understanding it. > >

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

Le 22/07/2020 à 03:32, Aaron Hill a écrit : On 2020-07-21 5:39 pm, Owen Lamb wrote: corpuses (corpori?) Off-topic: "corpora" is the plural in English.  Though while "corpuses" is not technically correct, I would have no problem understanding it. Yes, Latin would prescribe corpora as the p

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

On 7/22/2020 12:09 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote: We have it in our university library.  Would you like me to get it and make some page scans? I expect there are editions of that one with both shaped and unshaped notes. If it's shaped notes, and it's not too much bother, and it's felt to be helpful

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 11:00 AM Karlin High wrote: > On 7/22/2020 11:15 AM, Carl Sorensen wrote: > > But to my eye, the Mennonite Hymnal from 1969 has the best aesthetics of > > all the scans you shared. > > Much of the shape-note tradition is aimed at amateurs. It's trying to > get a strong com

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

On 7/22/2020 11:15 AM, Carl Sorensen wrote: But to my eye, the Mennonite Hymnal from 1969 has the best aesthetics of all the scans you shared. Much of the shape-note tradition is aimed at amateurs. It's trying to get a strong community-wide music tradition from minimal educational resources.

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 9:54 AM Karlin High wrote: > On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 7:40 PM Owen Lamb wrote: > > Are there any corpuses (corpori?) of shape-note repertoire that I can > > cite for my proposal (perhaps what was once used to determine our own > > set)? > > (Re-sending to list without 4

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 7:40 PM Owen Lamb wrote: > Are there any corpuses (corpori?) of shape-note repertoire that I can > cite for my proposal (perhaps what was once used to determine our own > set)? (Re-sending to list without 4 PDF attachments, ~2 MB. Instead, a Google Drive link is given

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

Werner LEMBERG writes: >> Heartland Hymns, 2005 (PDF attached. Yes, Fraktur in 2005. The >> German-speaking Mennonite communities were in the USA since 1710 or >> so and didn't get the memo that Antiqua has won. The remaining >> German speakers are stuck HARD on Fraktur.) >>

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

> Heartland Hymns, 2005 (PDF attached. Yes, Fraktur in 2005. The > German-speaking Mennonite communities were in the USA since 1710 or > so and didn't get the memo that Antiqua has won. The remaining > German speakers are stuck HARD on Fraktur.) > And they d

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 6:40 PM Owen Lamb wrote: > > > Are there any corpuses (corpori?) of shape-note repertoire that I can cite > for my proposal (perhaps what was once used to determine our own set)? > The originals were developed in consultation with the shape note community. You can see a

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

On 2020-07-21 5:39 pm, Owen Lamb wrote: SMuFL needs to define the following: - Whole noteheads separately from half noteheads (SMuFL only distinguishes between white, black, and doubleWhole), "noteheadWhole" (U+E0A2) exists distinct from "noteheadHalf" (U+E0A3). And there is "noteheadB

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 8:25 PM Werner LEMBERG wrote: > > > [...] This will allow other programs to throw an error when, e.g., > > noteShapeKeystoneBlack isn't found in the font, notifying the user > > that something's wrong. If the correct styleset is used, the > > program will correctly displa

Re: GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

> LilyPond's catalog of shape-note noteheads is unique because it > contains three full sets of noteheads--Aikin (default), Funk, and > Walker. [...] > > My current plan is to define the Aikin noteheads as described in the > SMuFL specs, while the other two sets will be stylistic alternates > wi

GSoC 2020: Shape-note notehead encoding

Hi all, LilyPond's catalog of shape-note noteheads is unique because it contains three full sets of noteheads--Aikin (default), Funk, and Walker. Even if some noteheads are similar between the three sets, they are deliberately defined separately and have slightly different looks.* SMuFL has no pro