Re: Automatic beaming in melismas

[Jean-Charles Malahieude]

Le 22/03/2012 13:00, Janek Warchoł disait :
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Francisco Vila  wrote:
> > 2012/3/22 Janek Warchoł:
> > > What i suggest would be quite the opposite: every melisma should be
> > > indicated using a melisma command, and *then* user can decide how he
> > > wants melismas to look like: should every melisma be automatically
> > > marked with a slur, or a dotted slur, or should beaming be used for
> > > it, or something different (or nothing at all).
> >
> > For (specifically) vocal scores, slurs are not redundant to indicate
> > melismas. Melismas are indicated in the score by slurs, so slur
> > equals melisma.
>
> Not always.  Sometimes they're also used for portamento between syllabes.

I then use a "phrasing slur": a4\( \melisma b8 c\) \melismaEnd


> > But I agree on it would be good to separate both so to ease reusing of
> > that music in other contexts.
>
> Glad that we agree here.
> Also, one all-purpose melisma command would be simpler to understand for users.
>
> > > Of course, a shorter (preferably one-character) command name should be
> > > chosen.  \melisma and \melismaEnd is too much typing.
> >
> > It is standard policy of lilypond's syntax to have meaningful names
> > for commands and you can always define your shorter commands.
>
> well, we don't have a \slur and \slurEnd commands.  Aslo, melismas
> appear so often that i think the syntax should be standarized.
> But i'm not at all against having both full name and shortcut,
> similarly to -\staccato and -.

The main problem in this case, in my opinion, is that you can't even 
build a shortcut for combining melisma and autobeaming, since beaming is 
*prefix* and melisma *postfix*.

By the way, I always write:
  \new Staff <<
    \set Staff.autoBeaming = ##f
    \new Voice = "melody" { \notes }
    \new Lyrics \lyricsto "melody" { \words }
  >>

in order to reuse \notes anywhere else.

Cheers,
Jean-Charles