Re: Allows slurs to break at barlines. (issue 7424049)

[David Kastrup]

"Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote Wednesday, March 20, 2013 10:38 PM
>
>
>> "address@hidden" <address@hidden> writes:
>> 
>>> On 20 mars 2013, at 09:26, Trevor Daniels <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>
>>>> At the risk of prolonging the bike-shedding, here's my take.  For
>>>> me, the key consideration is to provide an easily remembered name
>>>> that can be internally vocalised as the slur is typed in.  And we
>>>> need a user-centric (not developer-centric) word - what is the
>>>> user's conception of such a slur?  Also we need an attribute of the
>>>> end point of the slur, not the slur as a whole, since it is to be
>>>> applied to an end point.  The word should fit comfortably as an
>>>> adjective in the phrase "xxx slur start/end" as "free slur end" to
>>>> aid vocalisation.
>>>> 
>>>> I'm not keen on \broken or \fake; they have other incorrect and
>>>> unhelpful connotations.  \detached or \free are better.  Others
>>>> might be \floating, \hanging, \loose, \dangling, although these are
>>>> a bit long.  Of all the suggestions so far I prefer \free.
>>
>> \free sounds connected to garbage collection.  
>
> Not to a LilyPond user - that's development-think and not really
> relevant to a user interface.
>
> See this piece of string?  Take the free end and ...
> See this slur?  Take the free end and ...
>
> \free still seems the best to me - ticks all the boxes.

It's not really free since it can only occur in particular places and
needs to get matched to other spanner ends in a rather rigid way.  What
about \extra ?  It's similar to \free but sounds like a more likely
candidate for removal (when unfolding).

>> \span is already taken by Scheme.  \split seems available.  It's a tiny
>> bit nicer than broken in that
>> a) it's not the same "broken" as in line break where the pieces stay
>>   next to each other
>> b) it's not the same "broken" as in broken clocks
>> c) "split" suggests somewhat more that the pieces go separate ways
>
> Only when applied to the slur as a whole.  But we want something
> that applied to a slur ending.  The end can't be split.

Yup, that's why it's just a tiny bit nicer than "broken".

>> What kind of word would people pick when describing a score on the
>> phone?  For a single occurence, "interrupted" is likely a good
>> candidate, but five times in a row something catchier would likely
>> win.  Probably "split" has a slightly better chance than "splice".
>
> Ditto,

"At the start of the second alternative, we have an extra slur start,
the slur ends on beat 2, a phrasing slur starts on beat 3 and at the end
of the alternative, there is an extra slur end".  Huh.  Works better
with "detached".

Probably worth a night's sleep or two.

-- 
David Kastrup