Re: controlling the tie "gap" [and a possible bug?]

[David Kastrup]

Kieren MacMillan <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi David,
>
>> I can't see that it this can really be regarded as a bug. Ending one
>> slur and beginning another on the same note is not normal usage - in
>> fact, I don't really know what it is supposed to mean. How does this
>> meaning differ from having a single slur over all 5 notes? Will the
>> meaning be clear to whoever has to play the music?
>
> Well, in this case, I’m engraving a Schenker graph… so I doubt anyone
> will be playing it.  ;)

LilyPond has its own functions for Schenker graphs.

> But regardless of the meaning of it… it’s a collision, and Lilypond
> should handle the case accordingly, no?

LilyPond tends to focus on situations that are considered to be part of
"valid" musical scores.  When working outside of that scope, it's not
all that unusual for stuff to be different from expectations.

>> In the normal case one wants slur to go at least to the vertical
>> centre of the notehead, probably a little further, and this is what
>> Lilypond does.
>
> Yes. But Lilypond corrects for the presence of (and potential
> collision with) articulations, etc. — why not for the presence of (and
> potential collision with) another slur?

Basically because it would be additional programming effort to cater for
this case that nobody considered relevant so far.  It's not by explicit
design or some grand masterplan logic.

-- 
David Kastrup