Douglas A Linhardt wrote:
Han-Wen,
On 3/15/2004 12:20 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
The other properties reflect some guitar and piano practices. I don't
see use of a merge-different-style, so please leave it out for now. We
can always put it back in later.
No problem. Thanks for the feed
Han-Wen,
On 3/15/2004 12:20 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>>>necessary? If not, then we can skip that option, and simply never
>>>merge if styles are different.
>>
>>I considered that, but I saw the pattern for different heads and
>>different dottings. Not having much
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > necessary? If not, then we can skip that option, and simply never
> > merge if styles are different.
>
> I considered that, but I saw the pattern for different heads and
> different dottings. Not having much choral experience (where I
> suspect this comes into play)
On 3/13/2004 6:00 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Patch looks OK in principle, but I have some further questions and comments.
>
Thanks. Any comments are appreciated.
> * Can you think of any case where merge-differently-fonted is
> necessary? If not, then we can skip that option, and simply nev
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> When running lilypond (I'm using 2.1.27), if you have 2 voices with
> different note head styles (fonts), the program will merge colliding
> notes, losing one of the fonts. The problem is shown in this example:
>
> \score { \notes { << { d'4 c'4 }
> \\ \overr
When running lilypond (I'm using 2.1.27), if you have 2 voices with
different note head styles (fonts), the program will merge colliding
notes, losing one of the fonts. The problem is shown in this example:
\score { \notes { << { d'4 c'4 }
\\ \override NoteHead #'style = #'diamond
