Am 13.01.2016 um 20:07 schrieb Pierre Perol-Schneider:
> The second is simply the easiest to read.
> HTH
> Pierre
>
> 2016-01-13 18:59 GMT+01:00 Kieren MacMillan
> <kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca <mailto:kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca>>:
>
> Hi Urs,
>
> > which of the attached engravings do you prefer, LilyPond's
> current or the modified?
>
> The second.
> And Gould agrees. =)
>
> Hope this helps!
> Kieren.
>
The more I think of it, the more I find the current behaviour
inconsistent. Actually LilyPond forces a subdivision when it performs
strictBeatBeaming, not giving the user the choice.
Of course the divided rendering is the easiest to read, but that's
usually true for subdivideBeams = ##t. Take the attached example
"undivided". Of course the second line is easier to read and therefore
preferable, but still the first line is possible - and even the default
behaviour.
So I suggest the following:
* Default behaviour is (as currently): point the extra beam to the
side with more stems (i.e. join them)
* strictBeatBeaming produces (as currently) the extra stemlet but
(new) joins the beams on the non-flag side
* subdivideBeams produces (as currently) a subdivision on the non-flag
side, regardless of the strictBeatBeaming setting.
The attached image beaming-options.png illustrates these three options.
However, as I'm aware that most people will want to have subdivided
beams at strictBeatBeaming's extra beamlets, even when beams are not
generally subdivided I suggest an option, say "subdivideAtStrictBeaming"
that does just that, and set it to ##t as default.
Urs
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
