[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: how close are we to having an "addAt" or "insertAt" feature?
From: |
Kieren MacMillan |
Subject: |
Re: how close are we to having an "addAt" or "insertAt" feature? |
Date: |
Tue, 14 Jan 2014 08:30:40 -0500 |
Hi Werner,
> I suggest that such a command allows for a third, optional parameter,
> which makes \addAt relative to the `rehearsalMark' property.
If you’re talking about \mark \default, then I could see the benefit of that.
The problem is, most of us overload \mark for a bunch of non \default stuff
(e.g., ‘eyeglasses’, text instructions, etc.), because there’s no other
mechanism available. And I doubt it would be easy to implement your suggestion
“filtered” to only the \default marks.
But I’m always happy to be proven wrong!
Cheers,
Kieren.
Re: how close are we to having an "addAt" or "insertAt" feature?, Kieren MacMillan, 2014/01/14