Simon Albrecht <simon.albre...@mail.de> writes: > Am 09.09.2015 um 08:28 schrieb David Kastrup: >> >>> <https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/4597/> >>> >>> My ‘possibly related’ statement was only supposed to indicate that >>> these issues have similar topics and are likely concerned with similar >>> parts of the code. >> Uh, this is _not_ a bug and _not_ an inconsistency. LilyPond >> differentiates in-chord ties and whole-chord ties (as with most other >> articulations). Using parallel music does not magically change the >> in-chord or out-of-chord character of articulations. Multiple >> whole-chord ties are redundant and flagged. > > Ok, this is convincing as an internal explanation for the current > behaviour. However, from the user’s point of view the two notations > are equivalent and it is not desirable to have them behave > differently.
Then the user better change his point of view. Parallel music does not change in-chord articulations to whole-chord articulations or otherwise. > IMO it would be a step forward if the user would not need to know this > internal distinction and recall when to write <c~> or c~. As long as we are differentiating between whole-chord ties and in-chord ties, c~ will be a whole-chord tie and <c~> will be an in-chord tie. Similar with fingerings. > The current situation impedes workflow: without direction indicators, > I don’t need <> either; if later a direction indicator is required, I > have to add <> also. Of course this means reconsidering the relation > and the handling of in-chord and whole-chord ties, but that shouldn’t > keep us from looking for a fix, should it? There is no "fix" since the behavior is deliberate, consistent, and useful, and no hand-waving "I wish it to do something more like I expect" magically creates a consistent and useful different behavior. If your expectations are different, there might be a need for better documentation in order to change them. But there is really no sane alternative to generating in-chord ties when the ties are written inside of a chord and general ties when they aren't. > It’s not important whether we call it a defect or an enhancement, > then. The only sensible options are "Invalid" or "Documentation". Please state whether you find anything unclear about <URL:http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/writing-rhythms#index-ties-and-chords>: When a tie is applied to a chord, all note heads whose pitches match are connected. When no note heads match, no ties will be created. Chords may be partially tied by placing the ties inside the chord. > I think we need more opinions on this. Anyone? -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
