[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: PATCH: Improved tablature support

From: Marc Hohl
Subject: Re: PATCH: Improved tablature support
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:05:45 +0200
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20090608)

Graham Percival schrieb:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 09:28:02AM +0200, Marc Hohl wrote:
Graham Percival schrieb:
Yes, this is planned.  It's been on my list of discussions to
introduce when the website/build stuff is finished, for about two
months now.
Sorry to interrupt, but what's wrong with prefix notation?

Nothing necessarily, but a mixture of prefix and postfix is
confusing.  I mean, consider this:

c8([\f\[ \dynamicUp d--\harmonic\cr)-\startTrillSpan \slurUp e](\stopTrillSpan\] f\!)

I see. A mixture is not the best. Definitely.
Which notes does each element of notation affect?  Granted, this
is a confusing example... but if we standardized on either postfix
or prefix notation, it would be simple.  Everything from c8 to d
affects the C, everything from d to e affects the D, etc.
(shifted accordingly if we used prefix)

I mean, we code and read music from left to right, so
it seems nore natural to me to have the command changing
the behaviour of a note in front of it.

Well, -> changes the articulation of a note, \mf changes the
dynamics of the note... why should things like \harmonic or
\makeRed (if somebody invented one) come *before* the note, rather
than *after* it?
So, as \mf and -> are already postfix, it is reasonable to do so for the rest,
with as little exceptions as possible.



- Graham

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]