Re: Document <> and improve other simultanous music documentation. (issue 6248080)

[David Kastrup]

"Keith OHara" <address@hidden> writes:

> On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 01:09:37 -0700, <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> On 2012/06/02 07:28:37, dak wrote:
>>
>> It would seem that _trailing_ <> are not really something we should
>> lightly suggest since it is unknown what their articulations will
>> attach themselves to.
>>
>
> I suggested it weightily.
> The notations attached to <> are engraved as if they were attached to
> a note starting at the musical moment of the empty chord.
>
> When I'm writing a decrescendo at the first beat of a measure, for
> example, I know that LilyPond joins it with the next dynamic if there
> is one, but stops the hairpin at the barline if I end it with \!.

I have no idea what you mean by "it", and _where_ you plan to place \!.
The example wrote <>\! (and since there was no \bar "|." following, it
is reasonable to expect this as an excerpt from continuing music), and
if the next note starts with a dynamic, the "smorz." will merge into
that dynamic which is not wanted for.

> That's the right thing to do, and the docs told me how LilyPond does
> it.  When the note or rest that would take the \! is separated by a
> double bar, key change, comments, etc., I happily type s1*0\!, or
> <>\!, before the double bar, etc., and get the same correct output.

No, the output is not correct.  Have you even tried the examples I gave?

-- 
David Kastrup