On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Dan Eble<d...@faithful.be> wrote: > Doesn't this mix up meaning and appearance? What will you do when people > come asking for LargeStaff, TinyStaff, LittleGreenStaff (for Martian music), > and so forth?
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Alexander Kobel<n...@a-kobel.de> wrote: > Oh, and by the way... No experience for this on my side, but are there > scores with small rhythmic or drum staffs? Then we should probably also have > a SmallRhythmicStaff, SmallDrumStaff, SmallVaticanaStaff and so on, right? Hmm... I agree that it wouldn't make sense to define versions for every different size (or color :) ) and to define resized versions of every staff type out there. A global variable would probably work for the size problem, but it's still somewhat ugly to have a version for every staff type. The the generic "SmallStaff" is probably the most common case though. So what do you think? Should the "SmallStaff" just be left as a snippet? If it is a snippet ideally I'd want to do something like: \include "small_staff.lyi" \score { \new SmallStaff {...} } How would one make small_staff.lyi so this worked? This way it would be bundled with the other global variables. The only way I found was to do this: small_staff.lyi ===== \context { \Score \accepts "SmallStaff" } \context { \Staff \type "Engraver_group" \name "SmallStaff" \alias "Staff" fontSize = #-3 \override StaffSymbol #'staff-space = #(magstep -3) } ===== other.ly ===== \score { \new SmallStaff {...} \layout { \include "small_staff.lyi" } } ===== -----Jay _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user