Re: Updating LSR snippets

[Dan Eble]

On Mar 3, 2018, at 13:24, Thomas Morley <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
> Now that I had I look, let me ask why you propose the simplified snippet.
> I can't see anything wrong with the current, doc-tagged, lsr-snippet,
> though. If a user wants it this way, why not demonstrating it?


The snippet has \mark 1 at measures 2 and 10, as well as other duplicates.

I propose that it does not make sense for a specific rehearsal mark to exist at 
more than one point in a score, that repeating a mark in a real score is most 
likely a mistake, and that it would be appropriate for a future version of 
LilyPond to issue a warning or error about it by default.  In that regard, the 
current snippet sets a bad example.

I also propose that the current snippet exceeds the scope of its description. 
There is no need to repeat rehearsal marks to demonstrate starting them from a 
given number.

This doesn’t mean that I think it should be impossible to mix letter and number 
marks within a score.  If it is valuable, I’m willing to submit a separate 
snippet to demonstrate whatever you think would be lost by reducing the scope 
of this one (other than repeating marks).

Regards,
— 
Dan