notes from Cantus Meeting 19 October 2023

[annamorphism]

-Some sources on Waterloo (which Google gives you) are 404 on NewCantus --the user should never see the number
Need.a friendly message for landing on the old pages—Debra to write this. Remove the “403” part .
Is this for draft versions, how broadly used is this? Could have it be specific to proof-reading situation or some such.

Need to get an idea of long the process would take to do the redirection. (Debra will check in on this later in the month)
-Should have a link checker run on this
When we do systematic issues we will deal with what doesn’t work right away, and after that it won’t take long to set it up.

NewCantus Admin panel: some are already fixed
useful to have it well-documented so everybody knows what things are named in the code etc
Some likely changes: “Office” to become “Liturgical event”
May make the most sense to do this at both levels at once.

Incipits:
-Can incipit be from standardized spelling
-Change to label (Full text MS reading)
-Make a script to repopulate the incipit in the chant page and side bar —just display first 5 words and hide the old “incipit” field
-Lucas notes that chant.incipit gets used a lot so may want this field
--Create list of empty full text spellings so these sources don’t lose their incipits
(Old discussion about incipits: #361 )

-Could the text field in all displays be MS spelling preferentially: YES

Syllabification:
-Plug in Dylan’s magic algorithm
-continue to override manually syllabized things for Volpiano (but maybe include suggestion for users to also change in full text?)

-“Proofread by” used to be by source not by chant but this is a fun development
-Is there a way of tracking who did the edit? Not trivially, but may be able to auto-populate once a box is first checked or some such
-should an edit need re-verification? No, this is OK (but see #1100)
-Note that multiple proofreaders can be selected (e.g. if one did text and melodies)
-old discussion of tracking revision history here: #636

Concordances:
Various options floated here:
-Should the chant you are on be in the list? I say yes but Debra says no. Look into how hard it would be to remove it from its own list.
-Can we have this folded up as it was in OldCantus, so that it is not so long for certain chants
-Or do we like having the summary displayed but the list default to hidden (which means it’s not asynchronous)
Conclusion: don’t do it if it introduces bugs…happy to leave it but look into removing the chant you are on

Merging of AD and X (or ?): Debra to figure out what these should be so we can remove AD.

MANUSCRIPT: replace with "source" throughout (#1097)

Weird bug with dropdown in manuscript feasts:
Maybe this should only list feasts in order of appearance (in source order)—one instance, gives all the chants for that feast
(There is also a bug here; see #916 )

CantusIndex repo created, we should all go look at it: https://github.com/dact-chant/cantus-index

“Chant ending” field. Would it be useful to know this for CU? YES
-Related to Michael Norton’s ER diagram of chants belonging to folios
-There will need to be a manual process to figure out what runs on or not
-Could decide to use it for CU sources only
-some CU already has MEI with this info, others have information in the Volpiano field

-Change the folio description to explain use of 0

-Problem with cantusIDs. Can we assume there is one genre? (Debra says yes, I say no…)
-Can we have users select cantus IDs and fill this in? Could we have “are you sure this is right”?
-Would have to make sure it aligns with the genre on CI—ideally pushed from Cantus Index

Discrepancies in user lists (I think this was a report on #1000 )

Image links:
Cantus Ultimus and IIIF host (to be credited)
Should we link to just CU or just to host library
IF: have both, people might have preferences for Mirador or whatever