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

[Martin Tarenskeen]

On Mon, 8 Oct 2012, Trevor Daniels wrote:

> David Kastrup wrote Monday, October 08, 2012 10:45 PM
>
>
> > 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.

I am not in favour of allowing different commands \times 2/3 and \tuplet 
3/2 to do the same job. My voice would go to: just keep \times x/y the way 
it is. I can't see what makes 3/2 easier than 2/3. And having the choice 
of two commands doing the same job with a slightly different syntax only 
makes things more confusing for me.

--

MT