[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Ties within chords inconsistency

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Ties within chords inconsistency
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2015 16:53:23 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Simon Albrecht <address@hidden> writes:

> Am 09.09.2015 um 08:28 schrieb David Kastrup:
>>> <https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/4597/>
>>> My ‘possibly related’ statement was only supposed to indicate that
>>> these issues have similar topics and are likely concerned with similar
>>> parts of the code.
>> Uh, this is _not_ a bug and _not_ an inconsistency.  LilyPond
>> differentiates in-chord ties and whole-chord ties (as with most other
>> articulations).  Using parallel music does not magically change the
>> in-chord or out-of-chord character of articulations.  Multiple
>> whole-chord ties are redundant and flagged.
> Ok, this is convincing as an internal explanation for the current
> behaviour. However, from the user’s point of view the two notations
> are equivalent and it is not desirable to have them behave
> differently.

Then the user better change his point of view.  Parallel music does not
change in-chord articulations to whole-chord articulations or otherwise.

> IMO it would be a step forward if the user would not need to know this
> internal distinction and recall when to write <c~> or c~.

As long as we are differentiating between whole-chord ties and in-chord
ties, c~ will be a whole-chord tie and <c~> will be an in-chord tie.
Similar with fingerings.

> The current situation impedes workflow: without direction indicators,
> I don’t need <> either; if later a direction indicator is required, I
> have to add <> also.  Of course this means reconsidering the relation
> and the handling of in-chord and whole-chord ties, but that shouldn’t
> keep us from looking for a fix, should it?

There is no "fix" since the behavior is deliberate, consistent, and
useful, and no hand-waving "I wish it to do something more like
I expect" magically creates a consistent and useful different behavior.
If your expectations are different, there might be a need for better
documentation in order to change them.

But there is really no sane alternative to generating in-chord ties when
the ties are written inside of a chord and general ties when they

> It’s not important whether we call it a defect or an enhancement,
> then.

The only sensible options are "Invalid" or "Documentation".  Please
state whether you find anything unclear about

    When a tie is applied to a chord, all note heads whose pitches match
    are connected. When no note heads match, no ties will be
    created. Chords may be partially tied by placing the ties inside the

> I think we need more opinions on this. Anyone?

David Kastrup

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]