Re: \mark and slur

[Noeck]

Hi,

> warning: Adding <> for attaching loose post-event

I would understand it best if the warning said any of:

Cannot attach slur to preceding expression
Slur is not attached to note or chord
Cannot attach slur to note or chord
No note or chord before this slur to attach it to (is that English?)
No note or chord is preceeding this slur


post-event or SlurEvent sounds too technical for me. But I don't know if
the above wording would be general enough. Is "note or chord" correct or
just one (perhaps most frequent) case? Can a SlurEvent be something else
than a slur? Is there a benefit of calling it SlurEvent instead of slur?

The new warning is definitely much clearer than the one before.

Cheers,
Joram