Re: entering music without \time

[Némo]

Erik Sandberg a écrit :
> On Wednesday 01 September 2004 22.20, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>
> > Sorry for the late reply
> >
> >
> > > To me it makes sense to notate bar lengths by example (i like in
> > > general when you can show what you mean by example; that way you
> > > don't have to learn a new complicated syntax).
> > >
> > > But there is a major problem: How would you tell the difference
> > > between e.g.  3/4 and 6/8?
> >
> > With a property you could define a default which can always be
> > overridden with \time.
>
>
> ok.. so the standard is to reduce as much as possible, and then there is a 
> list of pairs (duration . time signature) saying that when the bar length is 
> "duration", then "time signature" should be used?

Hello,

speaking about reduction, can I propose one more time my idear about 
lighter syntax for tuplet, something like a macro ?
Here is the link to my last post :
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2004-02/msg00114.html

Since "{ }" are used for music expression and "[ ]" for manual beam why 
not use "#" or any other sign, or nothing (ok, I know, frog eater have 
strange idear :o) ?

To resume, something like that :

a8 #2/3# r b d g b a8 g16 #6/7# a f d r b g
Or that
a8 2/3 r b d g b a8 g16 6/7 a f d r b g

would stand's for

\times 2/3 {a8 r b} \times 2/3 {d g b} a8 \times 6/7 {g16 a f d r b g}


For me it's not unreadable and we can save mutch time. Most people (me) 
don't know how to creat shortcuts with their editing program and since 
lily is getting better, I think that we gone be more and more. Saving 
taping time is good for lily.

The only problem I see is for syntax highlighting (and time coding).


Thank's

Olivier
--
Olivier <address@hidden>