Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org> writes: >>> People can argue that this is an unnecessary limitation; lilypond >>> can do a `better' job. However, I'm not sure whether we should do >>> better... >> >> We should, definitely! >> There are bad tie and slur shapes in Lily, but this is not due to >> not having discrete lengths. > > Umm, yes. I've meant: Should lilypond do a `better' job than the > engravers working with those stamps? I say no. This limitation has > become part of the appearance of well-crafted scores.
Frankly, I don't see the point in simulating well-craftedness by artificially introducing minor deficiencies associated with some of the better work. We don't make slightly eroded staff lines copying the wear and tear on the tools of particularly renowned publishers, either. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
