On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 11:50 PM, Joseph Wakeling <joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net> wrote: > > *A key assumption of this approach is that there is a one-to-one > correspondence between accidental and alteration value.* This clearly > holds for conventional Western 12-tone notation. However, it does _not_ > hold for many _microtonal_ notations. > > For example, if we are using the very common 'arrow' notation for > quarter-tones, there are two distinct accidentals that can be used to > represent the alteration +1/4 (i.e. quarter-tone-sharp): the first is a > natural sign with an up arrow, the second is a sharp sign with a down > arrow. There is currently no effective, well-defined way to indicate > which of the two is desired at any given moment.
Hmm. This is similar to the distinction between cis and des, correct? Am I also correct in assuming that d-3/4 is not sufficient? Also, is there a frequency difference between c+1/4 and cis-1/4 ? Or is this purely a difference in graphical notation? I believe that this is a valid feature request -- a single "alteration" value is not sufficient to distinguish between c+1/4 and cis-1/4. For an ideal enhancement request: 1) prepare a Tiny .ly showing what you want to do. Something like: // made-up syntax #define qis as "one quarter-tone sharp" #define qes as "one quarter-tone flat" \displayMusic { // these should have different representations! cqs2 cisqes2 } err, ok, I already made up the example, so you don't need to do this. NB: this request is only about the internal representation, not the graphical output. As a general rule -- please take the time to prepare a tiny .ly example showing what you wanted to do. It took me about 10 minutes to read your email, think about it, and prepare a good tiny example. Since you're more familiar with this material, you probably could have made the example in 2-3 minutes. Having an example makes the difference between a developer understanding the issue in a matter of 30 seconds vs. 3 minutes, and when we have over 400 open bugs+enhancement requests, that difference is significant. Please note that I'm not trying to be snarky or lazy here. It's just that I've honestly seen the difference between well-written (i.e. small) proposals and vague requests -- better proposals tend to get action sooner. Recall Pascal's "I apologize that this letter is so long - I lacked the time to make it short." 2) make a scan of some published music that uses this notation. This will immediately silence anybody who wants to argue (as I somewhat did) that a single fraction is sufficient to show any microtonal notation. 3) send it the bug list so that it gets added to the tracker. 4) wait. Maybe offer a bounty to entice somebody to work on it. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel