-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Am Montag, 6. Oktober 2008 schrieb Paul Matthews: > The same applies to slurs > c( d e) would become (c d e) > > Technically it should not be required to have a different symbol for both > slurs and phrasing slurs. Parsers I've seen can count how deep they are: > c\( c( d) e\) would become (c (c d) e)
It's not a technical issue, but a musical issue. Normal slurs are melismata (so only one lyrics syllable is assigned to the whole sequence of slurred notes), while a phrasing slur is something completely different from a musical standpoint. A phrasing slur means that a whole sequence of notes with their own lyrics has to be sung/played legato as a phrase (i.e. no audible breathing!). Cheers, Reinhold - -- - ------------------------------------------------------------------ Reinhold Kainhofer, Vienna University of Technology, Austria email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/ * Financial and Actuarial Mathematics, TU Wien, http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/ * K Desktop Environment, http://www.kde.org, KOrganizer maintainer * Chorvereinigung "Jung-Wien", http://www.jung-wien.at/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFI6VkATqjEwhXvPN0RAtnuAJ4+gQy0L1bcpuHs4HCHt9MCsv6/lgCgoj7B 2NUqE5ug6A064FRivVP08zA= =KFyx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
