Re: Changing voice order...

[Urs Liska]

David,

Am 04.11.2016 um 00:45 schrieb Flaming Hakama by Elaine:

due to the confusion between the intention of vertical-order-in-the-staff and what the << // // // >> construct actually does (there is no relationship),

Actually I *do* think you are misunderstanding some things here, and I conclude this from your first post in this thread:

Am 03.11.2016 um 18:11 schrieb Flaming Hakama by Elaine:

Top to bottom on the staff has ONLY to do with the relative pitches.  For example, whenever an Alto part goes lower than the Soprano in an SATB arrangment, then the staff order (during that voice crossing) from top to bottom is ASTB, not SATB.  

What this suggests is that you're mixing up is the idea of top-to-bottom *voices* versus an idea of (local) top-to-bottom *notes*. When we talk about multiple voices in a staff these voices *do* of course have a top-to-bottom order of the voices (as a whole), in the case of vocal music usually SATB. If we're talking about, say, multiple voices in a piano staff (e.g. three voices in the right hand staff) the ordering is somewhat arbitrary, but still there is a top-to-bottom order of the voices.
Each voice then has a set of properties governing directions and (optional) indentation, grouped by LilyPond's \voiceXXX commands. In strict polyphony these properties don't change with voice crossings, quite the contrary, they are required to identify the continuity of crossed voices.

You are right in saying that << // // // >> does not correspond to a top-to-bottom voicing - but that is more or less what this thread was starting with originally. This construct assigns the voice properties in an order that does *not* correspond to the top-to-bottom order of voices, and the question was if there's a way to harmonize automatic voice assignment with what users usually expect.

Of course it can be argued whether a change is necessary, and if so what would be the best option to not confuse new and seasoned users. But I think the basic assumption of the original post in the thread was correct.

Best
Urs