@Jojo, I wanted to show what to type so it will show what is in your reply. Using / left the / in the text and didn't convert the number to a title as it did for you. Copying what we want it to look like does not work either. Here's the result of copying your post
Why not #281511: [Epic] Braille friendly musicxml export?
There is no link, and presumably it will not automatically cross link.
Comments
To add an issue type
Related to [ #281511]
without the space before the # into a comment in the other issue.
Why not #281511: [EPIC] Braille friendly musicxml export?
@Jojo, I wanted to show what to type so it will show what is in your reply. Using / left the / in the text and didn't convert the number to a title as it did for you. Copying what we want it to look like does not work either. Here's the result of copying your post
Why not #281511: [Epic] Braille friendly musicxml export?
There is no link, and presumably it will not automatically cross link.
sure, but why shouldn't it?
Anyway, simpler to notate is "\[#281511\]" (results in "[#281511]"), no need to explain that you need to drop the space ;-)
How about adding: [MusicXML] Arpeggio doesn't appear over multi-voice notes: https://musescore.org/en/node/270643 (multi-voice arpeggios)?
Every MusicXML export problem is probably pertinent: (See [EPIC] MusicXML import/export issues: https://musescore.org/en/node/270643).
You mean #16884: [MusicXML] Arpeggio doesn't appear over multi-voice notes and #270643: [EPIC] MusicXML import/export issues
In reply to You mean #16884: [MusicXML]… by Jojo-Schmitz
Yes, thanks for catching that.
Added.
Would it be possible to get a clear assessment of priority for these, also a clear assessment of which are regressions compared to 2.3.2?