On 2023-01-29 18:19, Lukas-Fabian Moser
wrote:
Am 29.01.23 um 17:54 schrieb David Kastrup:
Valentin Petzel <valen...@petzel.at> writes:
Hello David,I'd say that proportion seems low enough that providing automatisms for
in most cases definitely, but I suppose there might be some cases in
say piano music where something like this would make sense.
it is more likely to cause confusion than help.
I disagree.
Of course the feature is never actually _needed_ as it only saves a couple of [ ] signs. But the example I gave in my earlier mail to Werner is fairly common, actually - I attach some bars from Bach's Ratswahlkantate BWV 29, and there are much more of these in the violin original from BWV 1006. I'd wager it's fairly standard notation to have beams over skips in piano music, actually.
I don't quite see how the existence of a context property (switched off by default) enabling non-ubiquitous, but established notation could cause confusion. And after all, I think
c'8[ s s d']
without a second voice in between isn't that much more confusing than without the beam.
I agree! I was just typesetting a similar passage (by Telemann) when this email thread started.
/Mats
