[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > > results in property 2 being applied to section 3 in many (perhaps
> > > all?) cases.
> >
> > Yes. There is some confusion: a \property is something like (for
> > example) the value of "current clef". If you change the clef in one
> > voice, the clef for all voices on the staff change.
>
> John's idea is basically equivalent to the property scope rule which I
> discussed in my email from Mon, 19 Apr.
> Unfortunately, the original subject of the mail was slightly different;
> so, maybe some of you missed those lines.
You are all correct, but you are suggesting to change the way
"\property" works.
What I am trying to say, is that we need a second and different kind
of "property" (and a different syntax), while retaining the old
behavior of \property. A property of the input itself (and not of the
conversion).
Such a design would also ease the transition between the different mechanisms.
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** GNU LilyPond - The Music Typesetter
http://www.cs.uu.nl/people/hanwen/lilypond/index.html
