Re: Updating LSR snippets

[Thomas Morley-2]

Dan Eble wrote
> 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'm undecided whether I'd fully agree. For a user mark "1" looks entirely
different than mark "A", although internally it's the same.
Otoh, if one thinks to implement features like "go from mark F to back to
mark A" it's likely needed to have unique marks.


> 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.

Agreed, so I updated 
http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?u=1&id=369
with your proposal.

> 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).

No need for it, we already have an example how to format RehearsalMarks in
the NR
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/notation/bars#rehearsal-marks
<http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/notation/bars#rehearsal-marks>  

Thanks,
  Harm




--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Dev-f88644.html