On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 11:49:39PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote: > > David Kastrup wrote Monday, October 08, 2012 10:45 PM > > > Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@googlemail.com> writes: > > > >>> In this case, i > >>> think that \tuplet 2/3 is better than \tuplet 3/2 (for 3 notes in time > >>> of 2), because it corresponds to mathematical ratio, and is similar to > >>> scaling durations. > > > > -1 from me for this one. We have \times for that already and I can't > > count the times it took me to get the fraction right. And with the name > > "\times" there is at least the mnemonic of the name itself. > > Absolutely! Inverting the fraction for \tuplet was the original reason > for inventing it, IIRC.
Woah, really? I thought the whole point was to avoid the confusion between \time and \times. I think it would be extremely confusing for "\tuplet x/y" to mean the same thing as "\times y/x". - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
