Re: Mixed chord/note mode

[Jean Abou Samra]

Le 14/08/2022 à 01:15, David Kastrup a écrit :
> Jean Abou Samra <jean@abou-samra.fr> writes:
>
> > Le 13/08/2022 à 23:11, David Kastrup a écrit :
> >
> > > Well, we are currently in the position where both
> > >
> > > <c:8> and c:8
> > >
> > > are accepted syntactically and create a music expression, but the
> > > former is garbage that is not getting typeset but possibly has some
> > > effect in MIDI when using articulate.ly .
> >
> >
> > Yes, so <c:8> is something I'll never care about or see in the manual.
> So why care?



_Currently_, I don't care. It's not a piece of syntax
I have memorized.

If it becomes one, I will have to remember that I need
to use chord bracket for any chord, even if it's not
a polychord. That's all.



> > If I have to learn both and recall which is which, mental trouble
> > arises. It's not that _I_ can't remember it, but we need to think
> > about beginners and casual users ...
> Colon already _is_ being used in chord mode.  It's not like we are
> opening a new can of worms here.
>
> > > The last time we had a discussion about joining notemode and chordmode
> > > into one composite mode (often _only_ being able to talk in terms of
> > > chords rather than combinations of notes and chords is too constrained
> > > for practical purposes), we did not really arrive at any syntax people
> > > considered favorable.  Personally, I'd rather write tremolos as /8
> > > rather than :8...
> >
> >
> > { c1*7/8 }
> >
> > vs
> >
> > { c1*7 /8 }
> Yikes.  Maybe we had that discussion already.
>
> > Maybe use “//” if we go the route of changing tremolo syntax?
> Well, this is one of those cases where I get the "even worse" vibe from
> most alternative suggestions.


We could also introduce a music function. I don't think
tremoli are used frequently enough that having the most
concise syntax for them is very important.



> > > >   From time to time, a user asks on the mailing lists why
> > > > fingeringOrientations isn't working for them because they
> > > > missed that for it to work, notes have to be put into
> > > > single-note chords ...
> > > >
> > > > Random idea, I don't know if it actually makes a lot of sense:
> > > >
> > > > { c:M c:M8 c:m c:m8 }
> > > >
> > > > (force "major" to be explicit so ‘:’ has chord meaning if followed
> > > > by a chord modifier, and tremolo meaning if followed by a number)
> > > c:5 is already valid and meaningful.
> >
> > In chord mode? Yes.
> This wasn't a chord mode proposal.  It was for recognising chords in
> notemode.



Yes.

The current chord mode syntax does not fit in notes mode
because of tremolo notation. In any case, unless we change
tremolo syntax, we have to require that existing input in
chord mode be applied some changes for converting it to something
compatible with notes mode. Your proposal is forcing to place
each chord into angle brackets so it will be recognized
as a chord. My off-the-top idea was to force writing out at
least one chord modifier for the chord to be recognized, which
is another way to solve the ambiguity. For that to work,
we'd have to add a "major" modifier that would correspond
to the case where no modifier is given in the current chord
mode syntax.