msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca writes: > On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, David Kastrup wrote: >> To me it would seem that the default mode of operation should be for >> them to have matched rules where feasible, in order to have least >> element of surprise. > > I agree, but A. it may not be feasible in some important cases, and > B. even matched rules wouldn't really solve the problem, because users > would still have to explain to both the input and output systems their > own preferred conversion between note sets and displayed chord symbols. > (It doesn't help that the standard and traditional musical rules are > *screwy* and the nonstandard rules many people want to use are even > screwier.) > > Users want what they type to match what is displayed, even when it doesn't > follow the default rules and possibly even when it doesn't follow any > rules. For the common use case of chord mode being used solely to > generate notes for ChordNames, and ChordNames getting its notes solely > from chord mode, we don't really need the notes at all.
There still is Midi output. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
