On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Francisco Vila <paconet....@gmail.com> wrote: > 2012/3/22 Janek Warchoł <janek.lilyp...@gmail.com>: >> What i suggest would be quite the opposite: every melisma should be >> indicated using a melisma command, and *then* user can decide how he >> wants melismas to look like: should every melisma be automatically >> marked with a slur, or a dotted slur, or should beaming be used for >> it, or something different (or nothing at all). > > For (specifically) vocal scores, slurs are not redundant to indicate > melismas. Melismas are indicated in the score by slurls, so slur > equals melisma.
Not always. Sometimes they're also used for portamento between syllabes. > But I agree on it would be good to separate both so to ease reusing of > that music in other contexts. Glad that we agree here. Also, one all-purpose melisma command would be simpler to understand for users. >> Of course, a shorter (preferably one-character) command name should be >> chosen. \melisma and \melismaEnd is too much typing. > > It is standard policy of lilypond's syntax to have meaningful names > for commands and you can always define your shorter commands. well, we don't have a \slur and \slurEnd commands. Aslo, melismas appear so often that i think the syntax should be standarized. But i'm not at all against having both full name and shortcut, similarly to -\staccato and -. thanks, Janek _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
