Re: Reasons for cross-voice limitations?

[David Kastrup]

Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> writes:

>>> This would warrant a better mechanism to transplant spanners to a
>>> different context: basically one would want a mechanism to listen
>>> to slur endings in a different context than to slur starts.
>>> Possibly optionally with a \once qualification.
>>
>> I think the idea of an analogy to \change Staff would be a good
>> start.  Tell a slur that it is going to end in another voice,
>> probably immediately before it is started.  Maybe something like
>>
>>   \once \override Slur.target = "another-voice-name"
>>
>> or
>>
>>   \once \override Slur.id = "my-changed-slur"
>>   \once \override Slur.change-voice = ##t.
>>
>> The first one would require the target to be a named voice, the
>> second would require all context to listen for that slur.
>>
>> (of course slurs and co. are only one part of the issue, dynamics
>> and text spanners share the problem).
>
> What about defining anchors?  Having a slur ending in a different
> voice makes the `(' ... `)' notation extremely hard to read (if it
> works at all).  Instead, I can imagine something like the following to
> get a slur between voiceA and voiceB, starting on the second and
> ending on the fourth quarter beat.
>
>   in voiceA:  c4
>               \connect #'Slur #'voiceB #'myanchor
>               d e f
>
>   in voiceB:  e4 f g
>               \anchor #'myanchor
>               a

That's not going to work out when you have the same sort of construct
again and again and again.  You don't want to invent a new name twice a
measure.

-- 
David Kastrup