Re: 13th chord?

[Noeck]

Hi Harm,

Am 25.02.2017 um 23:47 schrieb Thomas Morley:
> So no bug, but a design decision.
> 
> To have the 11th included, one needs to explicitely state it:
> 
> \chords { e:11.13 }
> 
> If this is not done, the printing as E⁹ ¹¹ is ok, imho.

As far as I understood Rob, the question is not so much about the 11 but
about the 9 in the printed chord name.

Wouldn't E¹³ be enough to name that chord? What does the ⁹ tell?
I am exaggerating a bit, but if
e:13   is   E⁹ ¹¹
we could also label
e:7    as   E¹ ³ ⁵ ⁷. It might of course be, that I am misunderstanding
the issue.

Cheers,
Joram