Simon Albrecht <simon.albre...@mail.de> writes: > On 28/07/2022 16:25, David Kastrup wrote: >> There is also \startTrillSpan/\stopTrillSpan, \startGroup/\stopGroup, >> \startGraceSlur/\stopGraceSlur, \startTextSpan/\stopTextSpan, >> \startMeasureCount/\stopMeasureCount, >> \startMeasureSpanner/\stopMeasureSpanner . On the opposite side, there >> is \endSpanners. >> >> All of these strictly imply the beginning/end of typesetting, but then >> the problem of halfties is that the usual connection of beginning/end of >> typesetting with the flow of time is not there.
> Exactly, I think this would be very misleading. I don't see why. They are halfties. When there is a discontinuity between timeflow and typesetting direction, you have to pick one of them to describe the direction of the tie. As I wrote, left/right don't work well on their own, so I picked the timeflow-based one. Start and stop of a full tie are quite unambigous referral points. Note also that I did not suggest \startHalfTie since indeed a half tie does not "start". The one problem I see is that this naming might get into conflict with some possible future interface to cross-voice ties. But even then one could stipulate that actual cross-voice ties specified in that manner need a non-empty spanner-id . >> I was thinking of \leftTie/\rightTie instead, but then is the tie >> pointing to the left, or is it supposed to be at the left end of a >> repeat section? I thought start/stop would be less ambiguous even if >> somewhat uglier. > > I find it difficult to come up with something succinct— > \halfTieToTheLeft and \halfTieToTheRight would be clear, but way too > cumbersome. Actually, I think \halfTieLeft and \halfTieRight would > work just fine. There’s potential for confusion, but not if it’s clear > that the direction is from the note head. Does that make sense? Is it clear "that the direction is from the note head"? -- David Kastrup