(trying to make this as painless as possible...)
Renaming proposals, round 2:
CURRENT NAME PROPOSED NAME
------------ -------------
next-staff staff-staff
default-next-staff default-staff-staff
inter-staff nonstaff-staff
inter-loose-line nonstaff-nonstaff
non-affinity nonstaff-nonaffinity
between-staff (see below)
after-last-staff staffgroup-staff
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Notes:
1) "nonstaff" beat out "loose" by a large margin.
Sorry Carl! (:
2) all the ideas for "between-staff" so far:
* names consistent with the item1-item2 format
a) groupstaff-groupstaff (Trevor)
b) groupedstaff-groupedstaff (Trevor)
c) grouped-staff-staff (Mark)
* shorter names
d) inside-staffgroup (Mark)
e) grouped-staff (Carl)
f) grouped-staves (Carl)
Should we vote on this? I'd vote for either c or f. Here
are some of my observations.
First group, with consistent names:
The problem with a and b is that they might suggest "between
the last staff of one staffgroup and the first staff of the
next staffgroup".
The problem with c is that "grouped-staff-staff" might be
misread as "groupedstaff-staff". Personally, I think this
is a smaller problem than the others.
--------------------------------
Second group, with shorter names:
The problem with d is that it might suggest that non-staff
lines are involved, instead of just staves.
The problem with e is that it might suggest that it could
apply after the last staff of a staffgroup.
I think that f has none of these problems.
Thanks for your input.
- Mark
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
