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

[David Kastrup]

Benkő Pál <address@hidden> writes:

> 2012/10/9 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
>> The concept used for printing/grouping tuplets is different than the
>> concept used for scaling the time.  That's what makes \times such a
>> confusing interface.
>>
>> The pure scaling alone is available as \scaleDurations.  I have no beef
>> with it using 2/3 as input, and I would have trouble coming up with a
>> justification of using 3/2 here, actually seeing little point in doing
>> so.  One could use something like \compressMusic 3/2 but I don't see
>> much of a motivation for that.
>>
>> But with tuplets, the concept is not really "scale duration by x" but
>> rather "n to m notes" including all the necessary visual changes, and
>> \times, including its argument style, expresses this concept poorly.
>>
>> I don't really think that people consider \times and \scaleDurations as
>> closely related (and their naming choice is also totally different), so
>> I don't think that there will be much of an opportunity confusing the
>> behavior of \scaleDurations with \tuplet.
>
> I, for one, consider \times a visually enhanced variant of \scaleDurations.
> regardless how it's written, to me both mean metric change (and metric
> is represented poorly in graphic anyway).

Do you feel that the changed fraction gender of \tuplet would be a
potential source of confusion for you in the light of your view of
\scaleDurations?

-- 
David Kastrup