Hi Marek, now the summaries and descriptions of the issues got mixed up. I suggest the following:
Issue 2879: [musicxml2ly] spurious staff if an .xml file contains only <staff> elements with value "1" (i.e. <staff>1</staff>) AND no <voice> element in a chorded note musicxml2ly erroneously thinks that there are several staves. (I haven't tested what happens when there are several <staff> elements with different values in an .xml fle. Test file: https://www.dropbox.com/s/l9mt7iqd38lqqng/unwanted_staves.xml The result is: \new Staff << \context Staff ="1" << \context Voice = "PartPOneVoiceOne" { \voiceOne \PartPOneVoiceOne } \context Voice = "PartPOneVoiceNone" { \voiceTwo \PartPOneVoiceNone } This leads to a second unwanted empty staff. Without any <staff> element in the .xml file the result is: \new Staff << \context Staff << \context Voice = "PartPOneVoiceOne" { \voiceOne \PartPOneVoiceOne } \context Voice = "PartPOneVoiceNone" { \voiceTwo \PartPOneVoiceNone } and there is NO unwanted additional staff! In this case musicxml2ly should be taught to ignore the <staff>-elements if there is only one staff. Issue 2867: [musicxml2ly] unwanted voices if a <note> element contains a <chord/> element but no <voice> element musicxml2ly puts the chorded note without a <voice>-element in an own voice (PartPOneVoiceNone) instead of placing the notes in a chord construct (< a' c''>1) in the same voice. In this case musicxml2ly should be taught to be tolerant and automatically assign notes containing <chord/>-elements to the voice of the first note of the chord. (In MusicXML the first note of a chord does not contain a <chord/>-element.) Test file: https://www.dropbox.com/s/8bep4ly69xfwfmt/unwanted_voices.xml hth patrick Am 03.10.2012 um 22:22 schrieb Marek Klein: > Hello, Patrick > 2012/10/3 pls <[email protected]> > Hi, > I described two issues and posted two test files in this thread. > hth > patrick > > > I have added the second issue as > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2879 - please, check it. > It is not easy for me to create proper tracker issue for the first case. > Would you please be so kind and try to sumarize it? > > Also, should the issue > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2867 be marked as invalid? > > Marek > bug squad member > > _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
