(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 lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel