Hi Jean,
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but I am under
> the impression that the semantics of this
> new feature should be quite different
> from the usual \time.
I don’t know about "*quite* different"… but possibly *somewhat* different.
> We usually interpret
> 6/8 as (4. + 4.) because (4 + 4 + 4) has
> the representation 3/4. If you write 6
> over an eight note, you're not meaning
> (4. + 4.) because you could have written
> that as 2 over a dotted quarter note.
> So you really mean (8 + 8 + 8 + 8 + 8 + 8).
> Correct?
I suppose that’s one way to frame it. But isn’t that just
\time #'(1 1 1 1 1 1) 6/8
? i.e., are the semantics of the feature different before or after the user
interface layer?
Same, TBH, with \compoundMeter: In a perfect world, wouldn’t we want the option
to write
\time #'((3 . 4) (3 . 8))
instead of having a whole separate function? Why *wouldn’t* we want a \time
function that handles all possible time signatures?
Cheers,
Kieren.
________________________________
Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: kie...@kierenmacmillan.info
