On 2025-01-12 06:15, David Kastrup wrote:
Personally, I would consider it a bad idea to change "duration" here. It is used pervasively in LilyPond and is "good enough".
I hope to avoid making this another multi-dozen-response thread where people with diverse concerns pull it off topic in multiple directions. I'd like to focus on understanding "note value" rather than changing LilyPond.
The use of unqualified "note value" varies in what I have read and it's hard for me to tell which sites have experts behind them and which are dressed-up LLM regurgitation. (I can tell which sites have simply copied Wikipedia. Have you no shame!?)
I have seen "note value" seemingly distinguished from duration, either including or excluding dots, but excluding tuple scaling. Since starting this thread, I have also found it defined as what sounds like nothing more than a synonym of duration.
My tentative conclusion is that I shouldn't use "note value" without first explaining what I mean by it.
-- Dan
