Am I correct in assuming that we should postpone discussions of the "right answer" to jazz chords until 1.4? It seemed to me that there were way to many new concepts necessary to be thrown in now. The issues raised include: 1) changing to a more graphical representation of chord symbols does not allow for abstractification of stylistic preferences (triangle 7 vs. maj7, minus vs small m, etc.) 2) a strictly graphical representation does not transpose. (I addressed this hackishly by suggesting regular expression substitution. I take it back, as this totally defiles the concept that we can substitute the is/es sharp/flat convention with other languages.) One I have brought up in the past: 3) the text layout capabilities (especially collision avoidance) seemed nonexistent or very primitive last I checked. Backing out to TeX for symbol layout makes this automatically braindead, since the box cannot be sized beforehand without reproducing the functionality of TeX, in which case you may as well lay out the symbol yourself. I will check this behavior in the release of the moment when I get to it and read enough of the source to understand why before I make suggestions. Jeff Henrikson _______________________________________________ Gnu-music-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-music-discuss
