On 3/19/09 5:13 AM, "Mats Bengtsson" <address@hidden> wrote:
Should we turn this into feature request to make the automatic
subdivision of beams even more flexible, with separate rules for
different note lengths, or would the resulting scheme get too messy to
use and implement?
It seems to me that this should be a feature request.
It also seems to me that we could make this quite easy to use as a default.
We currently have beatGrouping used to end beams and beatLength used to
subdivide beams.
If we want more control over ending beams, we use override-auto-beam-setting
to add beam endings for specific beam types (16th, 32ned, etc.)
We should be able to add a functionality for override-beam-subdivision that
is beam type specific, just like we've done for beam endings. Although it
may be somewhat hard to get just right, the documentation is in *much*
better shape than it used to be (thanks, Trevor), and we can use a
corresponding syntax so it must only be learned once.