Re: 2.16.0 Open string fingering marks have _ and ^ behave as ^

[Olivier Biot]

On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:01 AM, Thomas Morley
<address@hidden> wrote:
> 2012/11/5 Olivier Biot <address@hidden>:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I think I just found a Lilypond bug.
>>
>> The following snippet with fingerings does only show one "open string"
>> fingering while TWO have been written. The order of _ and ^ play no
>> role in this bug.
>>
>> Expected behavior: both "\open" fingerings are displayed, one above
>> and one below selected note.

[ ...]

> Hi Olivier,
>
> I'm not sure that it is a bug.
>
> script-init.ly shows:
> open = #(make-articulation "open")
>
> So \open is an articulation (not a fingering).
> I think a note can be articulated only once in the same manner, so I'd
> _expect_ that one setting is skipped.
>
> BTW, \open is printed different compared to fingerings. I'd prefer to use 
> d8_0^0

Thank you for this input Thomas. For a cellist I see no distinction
between using "finger 0" and using an open string (\open). Technically
the "\open" macro is an articulation, but I do not know if it should
be seen as an articulation rather than as a fingering. Same with
"\flageolet" and "\thumb"...

Right now I replaced "\open" with "0" in that score snippet so I could
render both fingerings on the score.

This of course raises the question whether there should be a specific
subset of articulations that should behave more like fingerings (I'm
thinking \open, \flageolet and \thumb here). Unless I'm completely
wrong.

> P.S.
> If you think you've detected a bug, you should send it to the bug-list:
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/web/bug-reports.html
> On the user-list it might get lost.

Thank you for pointing me to the bug list!

Best regards,

Olivier