On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 3:14 AM, David Kastrup [via Lilypond] <
ml-node+s1069038n192707...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:
> David Wright <[hidden email]
> <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=192707&i=0>> writes:
>
> > On Thu 14 Jul 2016 at 19:07:41 (+0200), Jonathan Scholbach wrote:
> >> Sorry, guys, for being so rude. But can we talk about LP-features
> >> instead of arguing about best-practice-typesetting? That would be
> >> nice :)
> >> To me, this discussion is somewhat obsolete. A good program should
> >> leave the decision to the user. And that's where LP is failing at
> >> the moment, cause user cannot choose the option very many - not to
> >> say: the very most - engravers of choir scores opted for.
> >
> > I apologise for fighting your corner.
> >
> >> \accidentalStyle piano works in GrandStaff, but is needed in
> >> ChoirStaff. So can somebody please be so kind to invest her energy,
> >> time and skills into this problem instead of wasting her capacities
> >> in a discussion about a question which is at least in part a matter
> >> of personal taste? I tried to manipulate the scm/music-functions.scm
> >> but, since I do not understand it, without success.
> >
> > I don't know whether my contribution could persuade Phil that
> > reputable publishers print what he, as a singer, might find
> > confusing. However, as a LP Main Developer and a member of the
> > Bug Squad, he might be the sort of person to be able to make
> > such a that change if he was won over.
>
> \accidentalStyle is not about figuring out what the best way of
> typesetting things are, but about specifying one way to do it.
>
> So the threshold for a feature is more like "are people going to have a
> reason for wanting it" rather than "is it the best way to typeset this".
>
> Of course, we will save ourselves a lot of discussions if "are people
> going to have a reason for wanting it" does not imply "we need to
> provide an implementation for exactly what they are going to want" but
> if it is reasonably easy to make LilyPond do what you want without your
> particular use case needing to be coded into LilyPond in some manner.
>
Late to the conversation, but watched everything from afar.
So, I went into the file scm/music-functions.scm as well and basically
copied the alist entry for piano:
;; Stone's suggestions for accidentals on grand staff.
;; Accidentals are canceled across the staves
;; in the same grand staff as well
(piano #f
(Staff ,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 0)
,(make-accidental-rule 'any-octave 0)
,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 1)
GrandStaff
,(make-accidental-rule 'any-octave 0)
,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 1))
()
GrandStaff)
and I figured that adding another entry like the following would make it
possible:
;; Similar to the piano style, accidentals are canceled
;; across the staves in the same choir staff as well
(choral #f
(Staff ,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 0)
,(make-accidental-rule 'any-octave 0)
,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 1)
ChoirStaff
,(make-accidental-rule 'any-octave 0)
,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 1))
()
ChoirStaff)
But that didn't change anything when I tried
\accidentalStyle choral
or
\accidentalStyle ChoirStaff.choral
or any other combination. What am I missing?
--
Abraham
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/accidentalStyle-for-common-choir-notation-tp191797p192980.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com._______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
