Onion of assumption

Assumptionion?

There are a lot of assumptions we are making in our planned data collection and how it relates to the the fingerings that are actually used in performance.

1. (MDC) Fingerings for an imaginary (unmotivated, unvalidated) performance are the same as those generated for an actual performance.
2. (MDC4) Fingerings made for a performance in the past remain relevant for a new performance.
3. Entering fingerings into a web application produces the same results as those collected on paper. (Using an electronic device might disrupt usual procedures for determining fingerings.)
4. Full annotations, and not the presumably more typical minimal or targeted annotations, are accurate.
5. Annotations reflect the fingerings used in actual performance.
6. Actual performances are consistent over time.
7. Read performances are the same as memorized performances.

This all again makes me want to study how people (composers, editors, and performers) decide which notes to annotate and which to ignore. The notion of fingering ambiguity should be explored. When does it exist? How can it be measured? Are annotations primarily to flag difficult passages--warning signs in a sea of automation? Or markers of orthodoxy in a sea of freedom/chaos? Or do they, with the help of some conventions, unambiguously define the entire performance? Where are these conventions documented? Ivana and Anne should be able to help with these questions.