|
Post by Ačāla on Jan 18, 2016 0:17:32 GMT
Probably not the bast time or place to mention this, but since EoF is being updated via user input right now, I feel I should ask, how easy would it be to make an "N X #" input into an open note? I would suggest N 0 0, as that is it; or so a guitar tab would read. However, that is Green. And the standard it too old for us to change that (and it would not be to anyone's benefit).
If this idea would be easy enough for you to implement, I'll just leave you with this idea. Though, I do like the sound of "N X #" for the open note.
|
|
|
Post by raynebc on Jan 18, 2016 8:00:57 GMT
So I was going through a chart with the new hotfix just kinda lookin through just because, and I saw something that I'm pretty sure isn't supposed to happen... Could you describe the exact issue? I haven't implemented import support for the "N 6 #" tapping notation yet, if that's what you mean. how easy would it be to make an "N X #" input into an open note? It wouldn't be difficult at all, however it would be better to get some other input from people before deciding on notations that likely won't match what ends up in other GH customs authoring tools that may still be in development.
|
|
|
Post by Ačāla on Jan 18, 2016 9:14:20 GMT
I'll do some asking around, and see what's going on. I'm not settling for N 8 #, though. I'll fight that, for as long as it's not done.
|
|
|
Post by raynebc on Jan 18, 2016 9:35:25 GMT
Why would it matter if "N 8 #" was used?
|
|
|
Post by Ačāla on Jan 18, 2016 9:36:23 GMT
Right, right. Sorry, I mean N 7 #. What I mean is, any number other than zero.
|
|
|
Post by JarheadHME on Jan 18, 2016 17:36:01 GMT
As shown in the images, there is a set of descending triplet notes (in this case, it goes O R G O R G a couple times) and after the last G note, it is followed by another green note, but that second green note is marked as a forced hopo in EOF. There is no N 5 # event on that note in the chart file.
|
|
|
Post by raynebc on Jan 18, 2016 20:38:34 GMT
Right, right. Sorry, I mean N 7 #. What I mean is, any number other than zero. I wouldn't count on 0 being changed from what it's always been. As shown in the images, there is a set of descending triplet notes (in this case, it goes O R G O R G a couple times) and after the last G note, it is followed by another green note, but that second green note is marked as a forced hopo in EOF. There is no N 5 # event on that note in the chart file. The issue was because of the "N 6 #" notation immediately before the note in question. EOF doesn't have handling for that yet so it caused the note to be considered "different" enough to allow the note at the beginning of measure 268 to be a forced HOPO. I've added handling to prevent this.
|
|
|
Post by Ačāla on Jan 19, 2016 0:14:27 GMT
I wouldn't count on 0 being changed from what it's always been. Quite! Which is why I insist on N X #, as opposed to any number.
|
|
|
Post by raynebc on Jan 19, 2016 0:49:36 GMT
Which number to use for a notation is mostly aesthetic. However using a letter instead of a number goes against the .chart format, possibly to the point it would cause all existing versions of GH compatible tools to error out or crash instead of possibly just ignoring it during an import. I can certainly say it would cause the current revision of EOF to abort the import. I would suggest it's best to pick a less destructive option.
|
|
|
Post by Ačāla on Jan 19, 2016 1:20:43 GMT
Realistically, the way it would work is like N 5 0 has for the past. N 5 0 only exists in a completed .Chart file. To the extent of, prior to being placed, it is an event marker. [E *], to be be exact. The reason for this is that Feedback simply crashed when it tries to render an N 5 0. Same with N 6 0. It is placed (by me) as [E +]. Open notes would be placed as [E -] by me, in any chart file. Though, that would cause the issue where one would have a note that simply did not exist, until the .Chart format could read it. Even GHTCP can't read or recognize N 6 0.
My point is, neither EoF nor Feedback (and even GHTCP, if you want to get technical) refuse event markers. They just gloss over them, without parsing the information, should they be unable to read them.
|
|
|
Post by raynebc on Jan 19, 2016 1:41:24 GMT
Using an event marker would be better than an invalid note lane designation.
|
|
|
Post by Ačāla on Jan 19, 2016 4:46:12 GMT
Using an event marker would be better than an invalid note lane designation. As I just said, according to Feedback, both N 5 0 and N 6 0 are already in violation of that idea; and according to GHTCP, N 6 0. They shouldn't even be considered notes.
|
|
|
Post by raynebc on Jan 19, 2016 8:31:01 GMT
But it's less wrong than using a letter. In any case I will probably not add that type of notation unless some other GH related tool supports it. Buldy's conversion utility, for example, uses a 5 lane chord to define open bass notes and EOF exports the GHWT MIDI that way.
|
|
|
Post by Ačāla on Jan 19, 2016 16:31:28 GMT
I feel I should say, it's not that I don't agree with you. I just have a greater understanding on the .Chart format than you do. And, to that effect, I simply do not understand how a letter could be so "destructive" (as you put it). Referencing what I mentioned about N 6 0, alone or especially.
|
|
|
Post by raynebc on Jan 19, 2016 19:25:33 GMT
"Destructive" as in probably breaking many of the existing GH authoring tools. Programs that support the chart format all expect a number in that position and not a letter, at best they check for this and either throw an error (EOF does this) or ignore the invalid note. At worst, the program importing it would crash (I believe this is the case for Feedback) or import gibberish. Using a notation that cannot break the tools (ie. a 5 note chord or text type events) is the best solution. Think what you want about your understanding of the .chart format, I'm speaking from a software developer's side of the argument.
|
|