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

[Trevor Daniels]

Graham Percival wrote Tuesday, October 09, 2012 12:12 AM


> On Mon, Oct 08, 2012 at 11:49:39PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
>> 
>> David Kastrup wrote Monday, October 08, 2012 10:45 PM
>> 
>> > Thomas Morley <address@hidden> writes:
>> > 
>> >>> 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 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.
>> 
>> Absolutely!  Inverting the fraction for \tuplet was the original reason
>> for inventing it, IIRC.
> 
> Woah, really?  I thought the whole point was to avoid the
> confusion between \time and \times.  

Yes, you're right.  The original suggestion was by Werner, here:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.lilypond.devel/7989

> I think it would be
> extremely confusing for "\tuplet x/y" to mean the same thing as
> "\times y/x".

Inverting the fraction so it corresponded to the normal notation
came later from Francisco, referenced here:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.lilypond.devel/14554
which makes the point that \times implies multiplication but
\tuplet does not, so the more logical ordering would be better.

Trevor