[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Are engravers concerned by GLISS?

From: Han-Wen Nienhuys
Subject: Re: Are engravers concerned by GLISS?
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 09:58:04 -0200

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Jean-Charles Malahieude
<address@hidden> wrote:
> As a matter of fact, amongst the 126 engravers and performers, only 5 use a
> plural form:
> Completion_heads_engraver, Dots_engraver (despite its fellow
> Dot_column_engraver), Drum_notes_engraver (despite its fellow
> Drum_note_performer), Note_heads_engraver and Tab_note_heads_engraver.

Just as a perspective: the note head engraver is unusual as it
produces multiple note heads per time step.    The Dots engraver
produces grobs, each of which represent multiple dot symbol and is
hence called the Dots grob.

It's not that I am not opposing a rename, but perhaps you could devote
some documentation lines somewhere to these details, so people will
not be tripped by other details (eg. when they write \override Dot

Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden -

reply via email to

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