Overwriting existing tuplets

In my opinion, if I’m overwriting existing music while in note input mode, the new music should overwrite (and delete) existing tuplets unless I choose to re-create them. The current behavior in this regard seems more like Lock Duration. If I went to write new music over the existing, I wouldn’t want to preserve the existing rhythms. As it stands now, the tuplets are preserved.

I do understand that I can of course delete the existing music first, but it’s helpful to have it in place.

For context: I’m taking an existing piano accompaniment and simplifying it for a student.

The benefit of the existing behaviour is that you can easily overtype (e.g.) three triplet eighths with a quarter and an eighth (still under a triplet). For clarity, I’m not disagreeing that it would be nice to have it your way.

The current behavior makes it easy to input, say, sixteenth notes under an eighth-note triplet marking. I’m not sure how this would be possible with the suggested change.

I like the current approach. It feels like tuplets are a different graphical representation of a metric modulation to a compound meter.

An idea for a feature:
Currently, you need some tricks to have independent meters for different instruments and still align all barlines (e.g. 4/4 and 12/8, or 4/4 and 6/4 with q. = q). It would be great to enter 8th triplets in 4/4 and have an option to display a passage of only triplets as 12/8.

I think this would really be in line with the semantic approach of Dorico.

I’ve just experienced this. I had some triplets and wanted to re-input the bar. Lock Duration was off and as I played, the triplet rhythms remained. I suggest this behaviour is not conforming to the idea of Lock Duration, which preserves rhythm when inputting.