|
From: | Robert Schmaus |
Subject: | Re: Changing voice order... |
Date: | Fri, 28 Oct 2016 21:19:28 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 |
Am 28/10/16 um 11:01 schrieb David Kastrup:
Robert Schmaus <address@hidden> writes:Hi everyone, I've never used implicit voice assignment and I doubt I will start with it now. But since there's no real need for the ordering of voices _in the code_ to match the vertical arrangement of the _engraved_ notes (and isn't that also, what Lilypond is all about? You specify the input in a well-structured way, let lily care about the engraving) I'd find any input sequence other than 1/2/3/... counterintuitive.Well, there is still the question of what 1/2/3 should _mean_. Currently they are connected with \voiceOne, \voiceTwo, \voiceThree... and the meaning of those is "topmost", "lowest", "below topmost" ...
I see.First thing, I mean of course implicit "1" corresponds to explicit \voiceOne, "2" to \voiceTwo
But I take it, that this wasn't controversial, though ...Regarding the meaning of \voiceOne, ...Two, etc, I don't think there should be any change. Introducing alternative voice ordering commands - such as \secondFromBottom - fine by me, just please don't throw out the old ones. They're fine ... they're maybe convention but it's not a big deal remembering what they imply. I find them rather intuitive, to be honest - it's the most likely sequence I would use to arrange voices in a single staff.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |