Urs Liska <u...@openlilylib.org> writes: > Am 01.07.2016 um 09:28 schrieb Jan-Peter Voigt: >>> Hm. If this is a limitation required by the implementation then it's >>> acceptable. But from a user perspective I would be very surprised if an >>> ID isn't recognized without an explicitly named context around it. Isn't >>> that the (one) idea of an ID in general, defining an ID and have it >>> addressable from anywhere? >> Well, the spanner-id is used right now to have multiple slurs (or >> other spanners) in the same Voice. So keeping the spanner-ids in the >> current Voice would only preserve the current behaviour, if no other >> context is given. But OTOH (IISC) it wouldn't break the current >> implementation, as long, as IDs are Score-unique and not only >> Voice-unique. My preference would be to place it in the Score-context. > > I think for the given task (freeing spanners from the voice context > limitation) it is clear that we'll require IDs to be unique within the > whole score.
But that means that you can no longer let people write individual parts with several spanner ids independently even when there never is even going to be any cross-Voice spanner. Spanner-ids like \=1 \=2 are not likely to be unique when they are needed in independently written parts. So you start trying to make rules which spanner-ids are only supposed to be used locally and which are supposed to be unique at some level. And which level is better? Staff or Score? Lots and lots of decisions which are actually best made in connection with an actual score. And when they are written into the score, you don't need to look them up or second-guess them. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
