Re: [proposal] easy triplets and tuplets - Draft 3

[Thomas Morley]

2012/10/8 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
> Thomas Morley <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> [...]
>>> So, i believe that LilyPond shouldn't always follow her users'
>>> intuition, even if they are professional musicians.  In this case, i
>>> think that \tuplet 2/3 is better than \tuplet 3/2 (for 3 notes in time
>>> of 2), because it corresponds to mathematical ratio, and is similar to
>>> scaling durations.
>>
>> +1
>
> -1 from me for this one.  We have \times for that already and I can't
> count the times it took me to get the fraction right.  And with the name
> "\times" there is at least the mnemonic of the name itself.
>
> When I have a tuplet that is marked 3:2 on the tuplet itself using the
> respective tuplet style
> \override TupletNumber #'text = #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
> then it makes no sense at all that I have to enter it as
> \tuplet 2/3 { ... } for tuplets that are three to two normal notes.

Touché.
You have a point.

> That's not merely unintuitive, it is (oh goodie, no [talk] tag) plain
> absurd.  How can anybody write "\tuplet 2/3 is better than \tuplet 3/2
> (for 3 notes in time of 2), because it corresponds to mathematical
> ratio," with a straight keyboard?  How does 2/3 correspond to 3 notes in
> time of 2?
>
> Let me stomp my feet in defiance and holler.
>
> Ah, that's better.
>

LOL

> --
> David Kastrup


-Harm