question on musicNotation

Dear colleagues,

does anyone of you have (private) thoughts about how to improve the 
documentation (i.e. tagging) of musical notation?


Right now we have:

- musicNotation, which is member of modul.physDescPart and thus 
descendant of modul.msdescription

- notatedMusic, which I considered to be a element to be used in 
transcriptions as member of model.globel but could -surprisingly- appear 
within <musicNotation> though


In order to *describe* what kind of musical notation can be found I 
would rather elaborate on <musicNotation> instead of using notatedMusic 
within it. Opinions?

In analogy to <stamp>, <watermark>, or <seal> I would think of new 
elements like <staff> and <clef> to describe what's there. Surely <term> 
would do the trick as well but would be less specific.

In order to classify the notated music I would like to see @type defined 
for <musicNotation>.

Considering the description in the Guidelines that "If a manuscript 
employs more than one notation, they must both be described within the 
same musicNotation element, for example as different list items." but 
realising that different notations may share the structure of different 
layouts or different forms of decoration, would it be feasible (though 
not backwards compatible) to propose something like:

element musicNotationDesc
{ ...,
    ( model.pLike+ | ( summary?, musicNotation+ ) )
}


Best, Torsten


PS: BTW, ch. 14.3 lacks a space here: "notatedMusicprovides a way to 
signal ..."


-- 
Torsten Schassan - Digitale Editionen, Abteilung Handschriften und 
Sondersammlungen
Herzog August Bibliothek, Postfach 1364, D-38299 Wolfenbuettel, Tel.: 
+49-5331-808-130 (Fax -165)
Handschriftendatenbank* http://diglib.hab.de/?db=mss