2016-02-08 10:54 GMT+02:00 Christian Mondrup <[email protected]>:
> I'm using another text input engraver, MUP having this beaming
> approach: Rather than presuming a 'standard' beaming for a meter MUP
> lets all notes be default unbeamed. The user may declare beaming
> patterns on score, staff and voice levels. A staff level beaming
> overrules the score level beaming for the staff in question, and a voice
> level beaming overrules the staff level beaming. You are free to change
> beaming patterns where you want. A meter change cancels all declared
> beaming patterns.
Thanks for drawing MUP to my attention.
> Maybe PMX and M-Tx could have a similar, additional beaming feature?
Since Don has denied being overworked, my contribution can be limited
to suggesting a notation at PMX language level. Then M-Tx can simply
inherit it via the '%%' mechanism.
The A command is the obvious candidate. Maybe AB, but since the
suggested syntax for a score-level beam template will always start
`A[`, the B seems unnecessary. If instrument-level or voice-level
templates are to be accommodated, the B may be needed after all.
I don't think staff-level is relevant to PMX.
The suggested syntax for a template is to remove everything except
duration and brackets from PMX code in which all durations are
explicit. For example,
A[8888][8888]
would tell PMX to beam
| c8 d8 e8 f8 g8 a8 b8 c8 |
as "[ c8 d8 e8 f8 ][ g8 a8 b8 c8 ]". One would need a punctuation
character to distinguish between '][' and '] [', though, e.g.
A[8888],[8888]
would produce "[ c8 d8 e8 f8 ] [ g8 a8 b8 c8 ]".
-------------------------------
[email protected] mailing list
If you want to unsubscribe or look at the archives, go to
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/tex-music
