[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: \mark and slur
From: |
Noeck |
Subject: |
Re: \mark and slur |
Date: |
Thu, 14 Sep 2017 20:56:08 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 |
Hi,
> warning: Adding <> for attaching loose post-event
I would understand it best if the warning said any of:
Cannot attach slur to preceding expression
Slur is not attached to note or chord
Cannot attach slur to note or chord
No note or chord before this slur to attach it to (is that English?)
No note or chord is preceeding this slur
post-event or SlurEvent sounds too technical for me. But I don't know if
the above wording would be general enough. Is "note or chord" correct or
just one (perhaps most frequent) case? Can a SlurEvent be something else
than a slur? Is there a benefit of calling it SlurEvent instead of slur?
The new warning is definitely much clearer than the one before.
Cheers,
Joram
- Re: \mark and slur, (continued)
- Re: \mark and slur, Malte Meyn, 2017/09/14
- Re: \mark and slur, David Kastrup, 2017/09/14
- Re: \mark and slur, Rutger Hofman, 2017/09/14
- Re: \mark and slur, David Kastrup, 2017/09/14
- Re: \mark and slur, David Kastrup, 2017/09/14
- Re: \mark and slur, Rutger Hofman, 2017/09/14
- Re: \mark and slur, David Kastrup, 2017/09/14
- Re: \mark and slur,
Noeck <=
- Re: \mark and slur, David Kastrup, 2017/09/14
- Re: \mark and slur, Noeck, 2017/09/14
- Re: \mark and slur, David Kastrup, 2017/09/14
- Re: \mark and slur, David Kastrup, 2017/09/16
- Re: \mark and slur, Thomas Morley, 2017/09/14
- Re: \mark and slur, David Kastrup, 2017/09/14
- Re: \mark and slur, Thomas Morley, 2017/09/14
- Re: \mark and slur, David Kastrup, 2017/09/14
- Re: \mark and slur, Thomas Morley, 2017/09/16
- Re: \mark and slur, David Kastrup, 2017/09/16