2012/10/9 Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca>: > 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".
I always understood that way. -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
