Reproducible with a score created in version 1.3, not with a current 3.0 dev.
The first effect, when opening the Master Palette, is the disappearance of the time signature and clef.
We don't guaratee correct editing of 1.3 scores opened in 3.0 version. General suggestion is to open 1.3 score in 2.3.2, save it and open in 3.0 to keep working on it.
It reads the scores but not as good as 2.3.2 version does. We guarantee that 1.3 scores are read, but don't guarantee any further edits will be successful.
It happens not because we are too lazy to make read114() work as perfect as the 2.3.2's one. The reason is simple, adopting read114() code from 2.3.2 codebase to the new file format requires a lot of resources. Since the workaround exists it is a good trade-off.
Comments
I can't reproduce, exact steps needed
In reply to I can't reproduce, exact… by Jojo-Schmitz
"I can't reproduce, exact steps needed"
I hardly expected you would. That's why i made a video. But the site won't take the video.
Here it is as a YouTube...
https://youtu.be/jyudqoTP9ds
file seen in video...
SlurTest.mscz
Reproducible with a score created in version 1.3, not with a current 3.0 dev.
The first effect, when opening the Master Palette, is the disappearance of the time signature and clef.
We don't guaratee correct editing of 1.3 scores opened in 3.0 version. General suggestion is to open 1.3 score in 2.3.2, save it and open in 3.0 to keep working on it.
What then is read114() good for, if not to read in 1.x scores?
In reply to What thenn is read114() good… by Jojo-Schmitz
It reads the scores but not as good as 2.3.2 version does. We guarantee that 1.3 scores are read, but don't guarantee any further edits will be successful.
It happens not because we are too lazy to make read114() work as perfect as the 2.3.2's one. The reason is simple, adopting read114() code from 2.3.2 codebase to the new file format requires a lot of resources. Since the workaround exists it is a good trade-off.