Hi,
If I needed to set the Schubert Op90n3, which looks like 4/2 to me,
I might notice a single-C style in the manual, figure out how to use
it, wonder why the c's are not barred where Schubert has them barred,
look into the code, be confused, decide to use markup like I should
have in the
On Nov 2, 2014, at 10:58 PM, pkx1...@gmail.com wrote:
i don't know scheme, so i was mainly pattern-matching from existing
diagrams. some issues i had while trying to figure this out:
- what is the purpose of the baked-in cc/lh/rh grouping?
This was a feature of the original design
On Nov 3, 2014, at 02:25 , Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
1. if there is a glyph of the right name, use it
2. otherwise, fall back on numbered style
would be a good idea? I was considering that.
That kind logic is already at the end of
Time_signature::special_time_signature()
If the simple-fraction components of a compound time signature respected the
time signature style, would that qualify as useful or as undesirable? For
example,
2 + 32 + 3 4
- + C vs.- + -
44 4
—
Dan
Joram wrote Monday, November 03, 2014 9:09 AM
For the tempo we have:
\tempo Allegro 4 = 120
(and no rule turning speeds (4=120) into words (Allegro) - this case is
different but also similar if you consider the following.)
I would suggest this for times:
\time 4/2 C
and similar
On Nov 3, 2014, at 04:09 , Noeck noeck.marb...@gmx.de wrote:
The only
use diverging from the default style I encountered was a 4/2 timing
denoted as ¢. And this is not covered by the new rules (you would have
to use 2/1).
I don’t recall that anybody so far has been able to explain how they
On Mon, 03 Nov 2014 05:11:02 -0800, Dan Eble d...@faithful.be wrote:
On Nov 3, 2014, at 02:25 , Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
That kind logic is already at the end of
Time_signature::special_time_signature() now, but I don't see any way to use it
for anything except 2/2 and 4/4.
Am 03.11.2014 um 19:26 schrieb Dan Eble:
If the simple-fraction components of a compound time signature respected the
time signature style, would that qualify as useful or as undesirable? For
example,
2 + 32 + 3 4
- + C vs.- + -
4
