Re: Mixed chord/note mode

[David Kastrup]

Kieren MacMillan <kieren@kierenmacmillan.info> writes:

> Hi David,
>
>> _inside_ of < > we don't need to notate durations
>
>> I'd lean towards hijacking colon there in \notemode .
>
>> This is just a handwaving sketch about entry; conveying information to
>> the chord namer would remain an open issue at first and may possibly be
>> better tackled in the context of integrating the pending GSoC chord work.
>> 
>> Does that sound reasonable/useful/whatever ?
>
> Sounds both reasonable and useful to me!
>
> Is there any chance that in the future we might want to add an easy UI
> for different duration-log elements in a single chord (e.g., for
> violin triple-stops)? That might be something like <c2 e4 g4>, right?
> That's the only potential stumbling-block I can currently foresee in
> this approach.

I don't see any reason not to use

<<c2 e4 g4>>

for that purpose.  It already is valid input and puts everything to a
single stem but doesn't get the heads and some other things right.  The
only niggle with that is that to get per-note (rather than per-chord)
articulations/fingerings, you'd need to write

<< <c-1>2 <e-2>4 <g-3>4 >>

or

<< <c-1>2 <e-2 g-3>4 >>

since

<< c2-1 e4-2 g4-3 >>

would produce per-chord articulations.

But entry-wise, this is already supported well enough.  The typesetter
messes it up and I am not sure about the MIDI rendition.

But it shouldn't require new syntax, even if it seems tricky for people
to understand how << ... >> is something totally different from
the shorthand << ... \\ ... >> .

-- 
David Kastrup