3.2.3.7635 Show/Produces an unknown error which cannot be deleted?
Reported version
3.2
Type
Development
Frequency
Few
Severity
S3 - Major
Reproducibility
Always
Status
by design
Regression
No
Workaround
Yes
Project
As titled with attached 3.2.3.7635 "01-17 Bourree -MS3" Show/Produces a char "9", an error which cannot be deleted. "01-17 Bourree -MS3" is formatted by importing of "01-17 Bourree -MS2" with which "9" doesn't exist by design one day?
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| 01-17 Bourree -MS2.mscz | 22.63 KB |
| 01-17 Bourree -MS3.mscz | 19.72 KB |
Comments
that is a measure number, shown on the 2nd measure, of that system, as the 1st is an irregular measure and excluded from measure count. Indeed a new behavoir in MuseScore 3 vs. 2, but on purpose, according to esdtablished standards and by design.
Measure 23 though is not excluded from measure cound, but really should be.
workarounds: either don't exclude that 1st measure in that system from measure count, or set the 2nd measure to always hide a measure number and the 1st to always show it
In reply to workarounds: either don't… by Jojo-Schmitz
Thanks Jojo, did you see this in book printing?
no, I don't read books ;-)
To be honest this issue bothered me too at first, until @Marc Sabatella explained to me that this is the right thing to do. Probably based on Elain Gould's "Behind Bars"
In reply to no, I don't read books ;-)… by Jojo-Schmitz
Ok, I will get used to focus this "9" on my SCOTOMA when I read it. mr. Elain Gould is GRERAT.
In reply to no, I don't read books ;-)… by Jojo-Schmitz
MuSe is setteing up/building up new music notation writong standards.
No, more closely obeying existing ones
In reply to No, more closely obeying… by Jojo-Schmitz
Check the measure properties esp. the 'Exclude from measure count' settings for those 2 measures
In reply to Check the measure properties… by Jojo-Schmitz
thanks, real time support.
In reply to Check the measure properties… by Jojo-Schmitz
Excluding makes showing correct, but measure counting wrong for the ones after?
No. Bot measure 31 now becomes 30 of course
In reply to No. Bot measure 31 now… by Jojo-Schmitz
Confusing:
![1.JPG]( "1.JPG")
![2.JPG]( "2.JPG")
No, the other way round
In reply to No, the other way round by Jojo-Schmitz
Now all the incompletes are "EX", but the they have to be counted to get all the measues right:
![3.JPG]( "3.JPG")
Logical?
It's now a need of manual adj to "EX" for every incomplete, slow... and missing MS2
Need to look at the current score, but I'd bet "Exclude from measure count" is unticked for all measures
In reply to Need to look at the current… by Jojo-Schmitz
yes, you are right "the other way round"
not & not brings yes. i was doing 0+0=0. too long work today.
In reply to Need to look at the current… by Jojo-Schmitz
This is what we learnt the first time with our piano teacher when we are children:
![4.JPG]( "4.JPG")
In reply to Need to look at the current… by Jojo-Schmitz
This counting tradition MUST be strictly followed: Two incomplete measures at the beginning and the end combined together to be counted as ONE measure. Any one will agree.
![5.JPG]( "5.JPG")
Dose half turtle count as one turtle? so it has to be EX and then, is "1" missing, while "9" and "23" showing?