If we create a custom key command that already exists for a different function, can the two versions peacefully co-exist?
Examples:
the numbers on my number pad are, by default, assigned to “fret numbers”. Can I safely assign them as custom key commands for time value durations, and use them as such where I am not using fretboard diagrams, or will they create havoc? As well: would using these within a flow or file where I do use fretboard diagrams result in the appropriate “fret numbers”, or time values?
Similarly: the " - " and " + " keys on my number pad are, by default, assigned to “fast rewind” and “fast forward”. Would using these as custom commands for “b” and “#”: 1) actually work, in Write mode? 2) remove their defaults (fast rewind / fast forward) when playing something back?
Yes. By default the regular top row numbers are assigned to both Fret numbers (within the kStepTimeInputOnTab context) and durations (within the kWriteMode context). There’s no reason why you shouldn’t do the same for the numbers on your number keypad.
It doesn’t really matter that these contexts are called what they’re called under the hood; the point is that Dorico can use the same keyboard shortcut to do different things in different modes. The obvious example is Shift-F, which in Write mode launches the Fingering popover, but in Engrave mode adds a Frame Break. It’s also entirely possible to assign multiple shortcuts to the same commands, e.g. in the case of rhythmic values that work both on the top row numbers and on the number keypad.
Word of warning, though: don’t rely on the key commands web page (the one you linked to on another thread) to correctly show commands on the num keypad vs the top row numbers. At least on Mac, it’s incapable of doing so. If you’ve been relying on it thus far, try out the number keys - you may find that they already do input rhythmic values.
P.S. Feel free to edit your own posts or even bump your own threads, rather than creating new threads that all relate to the same thing. It’s hard to keep track of multiple threads.
P.S. Feel free to edit your own posts or even bump your own threads, rather than creating new threads that all relate to the same thing. It’s hard to keep track of multiple threads.
By adding another post at the bottom. Or for that matter, by editing an existing post. Either will bump the thread up to the top of the forum (assuming one is ordering the forum by “Latest”).
Perhaps “bump” is the wrong word (at least on this forum). “Extend” might be more appropriate in that one should be adding additional information to the thrread or asking a new question rather than just adding something to move the thread to the head of the list.
At any rate, I agree with Leo that it makes sense to expand (or amend) an existing thread rather than creating multiple threads all dealing with the same topic.