One gets faster at these with practice! Repeat instructions might look better above the staff. The combination of eighth rests with stemless notes is novel to me but shouldn't cause problems, though I can't see a reason for them unless there's accompaniment. Instead of having individual tenuto marks doing the work of a single episema I would have put a poco rall above "gloria tua".

francis - No, Kyrie XVII(C) is an exception to the standard pattern. GR p.765

I wonder why there are three different settings of the Kyrie for this Mass.

AF.. please post references (pdf or jpg) to support your findings... in the end, it is really not worth squabbling over particulars... if they are singing THE CHANT... schools of thought are irrelevant (as I have said repeatedly on various threads)

... hearts in prayer with voices repeating what the saints have always held primary are truly the point.

So, BRAVO for the effort, GEOMERTICUS

@a_f_hawkins
I think the problem is the modern books, in the old books you would have the two Kyrie for Lent and Advent, we sing the first one during Lent and the second in Advent. In the older books an older version of the first Kyrie is printed in the ad libitum section. Just as there is a simplified and older version of the Kyrie XI Orbis Factor, in the ad lib. section. The modern books give the 3 Lent / Advent kyrie all together as A,B and C.

@serviamscores

Nice! I like the simple elongated slurs... makes it very simple to read.

Speaking for myself, since this was a pew card, I went for the simplest presentation possible, hence single slurs (that either sit on top when ascending or hang below when descending—a subtle cue for weak readers) to make it as simple as possible to process by PiPs. The situation is certainly different for choirs or trained musicians, however, in which case I always follow the original neume groupings just as NOH does.

(In my initial draft I had actually included the sub-groupings but decided it made things too cluttered.)

Using the slur with vocal music for another purpose (marking out neume groups) sends a mixed message to the reader.

I don't know. I think it depends on the context. I appreciate knowing neume groupings, personally, but I read the original chant, so I know what the smaller slurs are intended to convey. They can also help you determine where emphases go in a long string of notes.

I think it also depends on which style of transcribing you're doing. I can think of a few general trends:
1a. – as literal as possible, honoring solesmes marking, using black dotted notes and squiggles to indicate the middle notes of certain neumes, etc.
1b. - as literal as possible, but no emphases, no dots, nothing. pure black dots à la vatican edition. figure it out yourself.
2. – mostly literal, but this time with black for "short" and white for "long" (this is what I favor for inexperienced chanters and PiPs).
3. - stemmed notation, be it quarters/halves, or eight notes beamed in groupings (the latter being particularly favored with some; I myself find it very difficult to read).

Options 1&2 can be presented either with slurs, or with very tight note groupings à la ICEL. While I like the look of the way icel does it for the missal, it is very finicky to set. Some people imitate this look loosely, but it looks very odd when you have tight neume groupings (no slurs needed) but then huge gaps between the words.

It's ultimately all a system of pros/cons.

CGM

I like your treatment of the horizontal episma over three neumes as dotted eighth notes.

Richard

Yes, more mathematically accurate, but perhaps using all eighth notes might more closely reflect the chant notation? (Punctum and dotted punctum)

This is my transcription (based on that of Solesmes) with chords.

I have found that the Solesmes way (and that of Juan Andrés') of notating chant in modern notation much more intuitive and easier to sing than other forms like the soprano notes in NOH (and Geometricus' version). Using quavers is more faithful to the pace of chant, and joining their tails together (beaming) on the melismatic syllable, rather than using slurs, is visually easier to understand for the non-musician.