Re: [talk] easy tuplets

[Joseph Rushton Wakeling]

On 27/09/12 19:15, Ian Hulin wrote:
> It's slightly off-topic from Graham's original proposition in the thread
> base-message, which was restricted to multiple-of-two/multiples-of three
> type duplets.  This part of the thread has strayed beyond extra valid
> values for durations, and we've strayed into time-signatures-as-tuplets
> territory.
>
> However what you say here is good information and shouldn't get lost.
>
> Maybe you should repost this as a separate [talk] thread, with a more
> descriptive title?

I did already post somewhat on this earlier in the GLISS discussions, but more 
in regard of the time signatures involved than of note-length indications:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2012-07/msg00924.html

Anyway, I can certainly write all this up in a more formal way.  In all honesty 
I'm not overly bothered if note-lengths like 6, 10, 12, 20, ... get permitted in 
Lilypond, but if it's introduced for some tuplet cases, it might as well go all 
the way.