Re: preliminary GLISS discussions

[Marc Hohl]

Am 31.08.2012 19:19, schrieb Jan Nieuwenhuizen:
> Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
>
> > Manual writers:  can we make up our minds here? I've always been
> > against frivolous syntax for shortcuts (one example in particular is
> > the "q" for repetition).  Why do we put in "q" for users to save some
> > keystrokes, and at the time propose to require a mostly redundant '-'
> > in front of zillions of postevents?
> Right, and getting rid of q would be quite hard.  Why not have your
> favourite editor (Emacs in lilypond-mode, JEdit or Frescobaldi) do
> the right thing, ie, copy the previous note/chord when you type q?
>
> The introduction of q says: we favour writing over reading.  What
> do we find important?  Better readability, saving keystrokes,
> stability...?
I don't think that 'q' means favoring writing over reading.
When I have a complex guitar chord with some string number information
and stuff, it would rather clutter up my editor window if every 'q' was
expanded.

By the way, the chord repetition *can* include the full information,
but normally some information is filtered out; see \tabChordRepetition
for example.
How should my favorite editor handle that?

So I think 'q' is both easier for writing *and* for reading.

Just my 2ct

Marc