I'm not sure if this is a language problem, or an attitude problem. Because it seems like you are coming to the opposite interpretation of what I say, despite me being very detailed in my explanation.
Let's start with the main point: THE VERTICAL ORDER OF NOTES ON THE PAGE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ORDER OF THE VOICES WITHIN THE << // // // >> CONSTRUCT, OR WHAT THE VOICE NAMES ARE CALLED Do you agree with that? You should, since it is true. If so, let's go on the the consequence of this: IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE TO NAME IMPLICIT VOICES WITHIN << // // // >> BASED ON THE VERTICAL ORDER ON WHICH THEY APPEAR ON THE PAGE, SINCE THEIR VERTICAL ORDER IS NOT FIXED. Any objections so far? On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 1:21 PM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > Flaming Hakama by Elaine <ela...@flaminghakama.com> writes: > > > On Nov 3, 2016 12:55 PM, "David Kastrup" <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > >> > >> Flaming Hakama by Elaine <ela...@flaminghakama.com> writes: > >> > >> > I wanted to jump in here because in this discussion, a lot of people > > have > >> > said or implied things like (paraphrasing) "top to bottom in << // // > > // >> > >> > should correspond top to bottom in the score", and suggesting naming > >> > conventions based on this. > >> > > >> > These thoughts, while well-intentioned, are bad since they are > > misleading > >> > for this important reason: > >> > > >> > !!! Top to bottom on the staff has precisely nothing to do with > any > >> > conventions of << // // // >> !!! > >> > > >> > > >> > Top to bottom on the staff has ONLY to do with the relative pitches. > > For > >> > example, whenever an Alto part goes lower than the Soprano in an SATB > >> > arrangment, then the staff order (during that voice crossing) from top > > to > >> > bottom is ASTB, not SATB. > >> > >> Sorry, I don't get your point. Stem direction and displacements do not > >> change for voice crossings: that's the sole way to actually recognize > >> them. > > > > Maybe you should read the whole of my post. > > > > I think we agree that the vertical order of voices/notes has nothing > > to do with their stem direction and indentation. > > No, we don't agree on that. The order of voices is not always the same > as the order of notes, and the order of voices has a whole lot to do > with their stem direction and indentation: the order of voices does not > change with voice crossings, and neither does their individual markup. > > Which is why any set of names that imply order (like one, two, etc.) > > are bad choices for the voice names. > > I like the numeric identifiers in some of the proposals a bit better > than the written names since they seem to suggest more of a _property_ > rather than an _identity_ of a voice markup. That makes it less awkward > to me in some manner that the numbers for the down-pointing voices are > assigned from bottom to top. > David Elaine Alt 415 . 341 .4954 "*Confusion is highly underrated*" ela...@flaminghakama.com self-immolation.info skype: flaming_hakama Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
