Re: Automatic beaming in melismas

[Francisco Vila]

2012/3/22 Janek Warchoł <address@hidden>:
> The current behavior is bad, because it mixes two different things:
> melismas themselves and how they are represented.  If i use either slurs or
> manual beams for melismas, i'm hardcoding some redundant (or at least
> partially redundant) information into my source file.  For example, if
> i specify melismas using either slurs or manual beaming, i cannot
> easily make an automatic keyboard reduction using previously entered
> vocal variables, or change melisma representation to other style.
>
> What i suggest would be quite the opposite: every melisma should be
> indicated using a melisma command, and *then* user can decide how he
> wants melismas to look like: should every melisma be automatically
> marked with a slur, or a dotted slur, or should beaming be used for
> it, or something different (or nothing at all).

For (specifically) vocal scores, slurs are not redundant to indicate
melismas. Melismas are indicated in the score by slurls, so slur
equals melisma. It is also very convenient to type. We are talking
about modern-style vocal music.

But I agree on it would be good to separate both so to ease reusing of
that music in other contexts.

> Of course, a shorter (preferably one-character) command name should be
> chosen.  \melisma and \melismaEnd is too much typing.

It is standard policy of lilypond's syntax to have meaningful names
for commands and you can always define your shorter commands.

-- 
Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain)
www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com