Re: 2.16.0 Open string fingering marks have _ and ^ behave as ^

[Thomas Morley]

2012/11/7 Olivier Biot <address@hidden>:
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:01 AM, Thomas Morley
> <address@hidden> wrote:
>> 2012/11/5 Olivier Biot <address@hidden>:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> I think I just found a Lilypond bug.
>>>
>>> The following snippet with fingerings does only show one "open string"
>>> fingering while TWO have been written. The order of _ and ^ play no
>>> role in this bug.
>>>
>>> Expected behavior: both "\open" fingerings are displayed, one above
>>> and one below selected note.
>
> [ ...]
>
>> Hi Olivier,
>>
>> I'm not sure that it is a bug.
>>
>> script-init.ly shows:
>> open = #(make-articulation "open")
>>
>> So \open is an articulation (not a fingering).
>> I think a note can be articulated only once in the same manner, so I'd
>> _expect_ that one setting is skipped.
>>
>> BTW, \open is printed different compared to fingerings. I'd prefer to use 
>> d8_0^0
>
> Thank you for this input Thomas. For a cellist I see no distinction
> between using "finger 0" and using an open string (\open). Technically
> the "\open" macro is an articulation, but I do not know if it should
> be seen as an articulation rather than as a fingering. Same with
> "\flageolet" and "\thumb"...
>
> Right now I replaced "\open" with "0" in that score snippet so I could
> render both fingerings on the score.
>
> This of course raises the question whether there should be a specific
> subset of articulations that should behave more like fingerings (I'm
> thinking \open, \flageolet and \thumb here). Unless I'm completely
> wrong.
>
>> P.S.
>> If you think you've detected a bug, you should send it to the bug-list:
>> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/web/bug-reports.html
>> On the user-list it might get lost.
>
> Thank you for pointing me to the bug list!
>
> Best regards,
>
> Olivier

Hi again,

I stumbled across
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=631

{
        <c'_\open^\open>
}

works.


Cheers,
  Harm