Missing relativeroot in op. 8 no. 10

[malcolmsailor]

There seems to be an issue in op 8 no 10. I'm not sure if it's an issue with the annotations or with the MS3 parser (or something else?).

The annotations in mm. 11 and 12 seem to be relative to bVII (e.g., IV of bVII, etc.):

But in the TSV file, they don't have a relativeroot:

dvorak_silhouettes/harmonies/op08n10.tsv

Lines 25 to 28 in 13502ce

	11 11 30 1.5 0 0 6/8 2 1 I/bVII[IV G I I/bVII IV IV M 0 0 -1, 3, 0 -1 -1
	11 11 63/2 1.0 3/8 3/8 6/8 2 1 ii6 G I I/bVII ii6 ii 6 m 0 0 -1, 3, 2 2 -1
	11 11 65/2 0.5 5/8 5/8 6/8 2 1 #vii%43 G I I/bVII #vii%43 #vii % 43 %7 0 0 -1, 3, 5, 2 5 -1
	12 12 33 1.5 0 0 6/8 2 1 I}{ G I I/bVII I I }{ M 0 0 0, 4, 1 0 0

[BeckerHanne]

@malcolmsailor the score excerpt is showing a pedal over the note F, so all chords are relative to the pedal note. What does relativeroot mean in the context of the ms3? One thing that strikes me now just looking at this is that usually the pedal point syntax starts with either I or V and in this case the square bracket should probably be at the beginning of m12 on the I chord, so it should technically read I], not end on the vi6] chord.

[malcolmsailor]

@johentsch would be able to answer better than me, but the relative root should presumably be F here (or the fact that the chord symbols are relative to F should be indicated in some other way). The chord symbols and chord tones are all notated in the tsv file here as though they are in G major, rather than F major. For example, the first IV chord has chord tones [-1, 3, 0] which (if I understand the fifth-based notation used here correctly) indicates C, E, and G, as though the harmony were IV in G, rather than IV in F.

As I say, I'm not sure whether it's an error in the encoding or an error in the MS3 parser that causes this issue.