Re: Issue 2070 in lilypond: Patch: Don't wrap EventChord around rhythmic events by default.

[lilypond]

Comment #19 on issue 2070 by address@hidden: Patch: Don't wrap  
EventChord around rhythmic events by default.
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2070

OK, I'm trying to understand the implications of things and respond to  
comments 16 and 17.  I'm not sure I'm clear about what's going on, so let  
me ask a few questions and make a few comments.

In the Notation Reference, section 1.5.1 Single voice under Chorded notes,  
it describes the state of articulations on notes in chords and  
articulations on chords themselves.

In that documentation, it indicates that articulations can apply to chords  
(which seems to make the most sense for what I would consider musical  
articulations, such as staccato, prall, etc.)  It also indicates that notes  
can have articulations within a chord (which seems to make somewhat less  
sense -- how do we indicate that one note of a chord is staccato while  
another is legato?).

The examples I see in this section just stack the articulations above the  
chord, rather than adding them to individual noteheads, so it seems that  
there is not really a need to have *musical* articulations attached to  
noteheads.

Currently dynamics are ignored if they are inside chord constructs.

Currently string numbers, fingerings, and right-hand fingerings that occur  
inside of a chord construct are stored as articulations.  If they are  
outside a chord, they are stored as events.

My knowledge of the parser and lexer is miniscule compared to yours, so I  
may be making a completely infeasible recommendation here.

But could we define "articulations" as things that apply to notes not in  
chords or to chords as a whole?  For articulations, then, c-? would be  
equivalent to  <c>-? and <c-?> would be a syntax error.

Similarly, for dynamics, c\p would be equivalent to <c>\p and <c\p> would  
be a syntax error.

For string numbers and fingerings, c\5-2 would be equivalent to <c\5-2> and  
<c>\5-2 would be a syntax error.

Currently, we handle fingerings outside a chord by assuming that they go to  
the note heads inside the chord with the order of the note heads inside the  
chord matching the order of the fingerings outside the chord.  This seems  
to be a non-robust usage.

A logical structure that says articulations and dynamics apply to a chord,  
and fingerings and string numbers apply to notes within a chord allows one  
to do the right thing if there is no explicit chord, it seems to me.

But I don't know if this is really possible or not.

Thanks,

Carl