Hi David (et al.),
> I have a hard time understanding how one can consider the visuals of
>
> { \time 2/4 r4*12 }
> { \time 2/4 R4*12 }
>
> as conveying the same semantics.
I agree that the visuals of those two things do not convey the same semantics.
That being said, I consider the following snippet:
%%% SNIPPET BEGINS
\version "2.19.54"
{ \time 2/4 c''4*12 }
\score {
{ \time 2/4 c''4*12 }
\layout {
\context {
\Voice
\remove "Note_heads_engraver"
\consists "Completion_heads_engraver"
}
}
}
%%% SNIPPET ENDS
The [note-data] *input* of these scores is identical — hence they ostensibly
convey the same semantics — but the *output* obviously conveys very different
semantics. So the addition of the Completion_heads_engraver *changes the
semantic space* in a non-trivial way, to the point that the original semantics
of the input are (as I understand it) impossible to represent in the new output
environment.
As I read it, Simon is simply wondering why there isn’t an equivalent for rests.
And suddenly I am, too. =)
Cheers,
Kieren.
________________________________
Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
