Maninpasta minutes: MockupDesign#1

[JaseMK]

No description provided.

[JaseMK]

NOTES...

CQ1: To which modes Vide homo has been assigned to in Tonalities? Leonhard, Bernhard, Harold, Siegfried, Frans and Alexander relate the motet to the tonus peregrinus. Robert, however, considers the work to be written in the mixolydian mode.

DATA REQUIREMENTS:

• Possibly automatic detection of modality based on different sets of rules/assumptions (in related scenarios)
• manual annotations of provenance

PROBLEM:
Show classification and provenance

• We focus on a single work: Vide Homo
• We have at least 2 schools of thought (mutually exclusive?) wrt classification of the modality of Vide Homo:
  • Tonus peregrinus: Leonhard, Bernhard, Harold, Siegfried, Frans and Alexander
  • Mixolydian mode: Robert

INTERFACE CONSIDERATIONS:

• Trigger for different views (dive into detail, e.g. CQ2-3 / do not care, go on)

CQ2: Are the criteria on which these interpretations are based true in the score and, if so, to what extent?

• What are the cadence points in the work?
• What are the part’s ranges? Do they correspond to modal octaves?
• What is the final of the bassus?
• What is the last chord?
• Are there any melodic patterns related to modality?
• To what diatonic environment does the work belong to?
• What are the part’s clefs and keys?
• Are the theoretical models on which these criteria are based – for example the Zarlinian cadential scheme ^1-^3-^5 – in line with this work?
• What is the tension between the expected theoretical criteria and their actual realisation in the work?

DATA REQUIREMENTS:

• Music annotations, either manual or automatic

PROBLEM: Provide details (show differences between) of possibly contradictory classifications
on the score

• Decision about status of category of modality, for example, might depend on judgement of where half way point (cadence, roughly) may be judged to occur.
• Desired outcome of whole process might not be just a set of settled classifications but tree of competing chains of arguments and evidence supporting different proposed classifications (Or would this be overly sophisticated for this particular example?)
• For each classification evidence are shown in the score
• User might need to run extractive processes during this scenario to unearth new supporting evidence (Need to distinguish clearly between final products for the webportal or prototype proof of concept systems !! This requirement could be quite unreasonable for production system)

INTERFACE CONSIDERATIONS:

• Primarily based around annotations for this step (on the music score if available, and metadata)
• Might be many surviving manuscripts relevant in this (or other related cases).
• Present filterable/selectable annotations from some classification criteria ontology [TO BE DEFINED AHEAD?]
  • Eg - automatic extraction outputs, links to other existing data, manuscripts, academic references, other pieces of music, open/free text metadata, score annotations...
  • Applied to an overall resource (score/document), or placeable in a specific points?
  • (In a different but related example, might benefit from annotation in audio or symbolic representation)
    Also add open/qualitative metadata and justifications?
• Each annotation, when applied, should be selected as supporting a classification of a specific modality?

CQ3: Can one assume that the modal ambiguity evidenced by the analytical interpretations is intended? Harold sees, for example, the use of modes in Lagrime as a religious symbol. Alexander suggests that Tansillo's texts set to music by Lassus can be read as an examination of conscience, advocated by post-Tridentine spirituality. Can these hypotheses be substantiated on the basis of Polifonia's analytical and heritage knowledge?

• Where does the work appear within the cycle?
• What do we know about this cycle and its place in Lassus' output?
• Which poetic text is set to music?
• Has this poetic text been set to music before?

DATA REQUIREMENTS: manual annotation (metadata)

PROBLEM: Show possible meanings. Provide context information to support different classifications. Allow comparative analysis

INTERFACE CONSIDERATIONS:

• CQ1- 4 are not just linear stages - these could be the subject of rapid evolving iterations
• User might be exploring different hypotheses in different branches of conceptual tree.
• In trying to resolve two or more different high level interpretations models or hypotheses, by looking at low level data that can be resolved in the graph, the users might propose intermediate personal hypotheses that might variously support or disconfirm aspects of high level hypothesis. Not a big deal, but just some bookkeeping might be required by user to keep track.

CQ4: Apart from Lasso’s possible exegetical intentions, what does this work tell us about the status of the modes at this moment in the history of composition?

• Is the modal ambiguity observed here frequent in Lasso’s output?
• Do other works come close, in terms of their inner properties, to what is observed here?
• Is the ambiguity observed here specific to particular groups of works?

DATA REQUIREMENTS:

• identify interesting graph patterns that can be used to recommend similar works

PROBLEM: Allow comparative analysis, statistical analysis

INTERFACE CONSIDERATIONS:

• Ability to search Polifonia KG or other associated linked data for supporting evidence of a particular theory:
  • Filterable by date, musical classification, genre, composer, annotation type..
• Some form of statistical analysis to test a hypothesis.
  • Eg - number of pieces of music from a specific time frame that have overlapping classifications or similar modal ambiguity.
• As well simple filtering techniques and statistical analysis, the system could/should offer some way of identifying or ranking resources of specific interest. Graph patterns...
• Comparison visualisations - explore visualisation techniques (graphical or statistical) for comparing musical resources and their accompanying classification evidence.

[JaseMK]

USER JOURNEY

• The user has selected the Vide Homo from some catalogue?
• Sethus is shown a webpage dedicated to the Vide Homo
• [INTRO] Basic descriptive metadata are shown: author, title, date, place
• [MULTI-MODAL] Further detailed info/page may include a number of resources that define the piece of music, including a musical score, audio file(s), description,
• [SCHOLARLY DATA] summary of linked data/existing annotations and classifications.
• [EXPLORATION / DETAIL ON DEMAND] traverse the graph according to one or more interpretations. Triggered by the previous [SCHOLARLY DATA]
  • Annotations of the score (with references to the provenance, the author of the annotations)
• [STATISTICS] context information and create your own queries to traverse the graph and get collections of other resources

incomplete - user journey also needs to move on to cover creating annotations to support classifications, visual comparisons to examine context and so on...

[enridaga]

Great! This looks like a sketch of a generic user journey on the Polifonia KG!

[JaseMK]

I added a couple more steps to the user journey to also include the classification and annotation phases, as well as making reference to the competency questions that each step addresses (where appropriate). Feel free to comment and amend/add to this as necessary. This obviously needs some refinement and development and is a very basic skeleton at this stage.

USER JOURNEY

• The user has selected the Vide Homo from some catalogue?
• Sethus is shown a webpage dedicated to the Vide Homo
• [INTRO] Basic descriptive metadata are shown: author, title, date, place
• [MULTI-MODAL] Further detailed info/page may include a number of resources that define the piece of music, including a musical score, audio file(s), description,
• [SCHOLARLY DATA] summary of linked data/existing annotations and classifications.
• [EXPLORATION / DETAIL ON DEMAND] traverse the graph according to one or more interpretations. Triggered by the previous [SCHOLARLY DATA]
  Annotations of the score (with references to the provenance, the author of the annotations)
• [CREATION OF NEW DATA] Running extractive processes to unearth new data. It is unclear whether this might be done via the portal interface in real-time via a web-API, requested for offline batch processing or will have been pre-run in advance.
• [ANNOTATIONS] Multi-modal resources that define the piece of music to be annotated, either directly or via links with other resources alongside metadata to describe these links. The annotations and links should provide answers to the questions posed in CQ2. Used together this metadata can be used to inform a decision on the classification of the piece of music (CQ1), which itself can be selected as an annotation to the resource.
• [STATISTICS] Create your own queries to traverse the graph and get collections of other resources matching specific criteria that may help answer the questions posed in CQ3/CQ4. This may include tools for comparative and contextual visualisation.