On Wed 18 Aug 2021 at 18:18:04 (+0200), Jean Abou Samra wrote: > Le 18/08/2021 à 17:23, Knute Snortum a écrit : > > That clarifies things, thanks. > > > > What would you think about changing the documentation to say something > > like, "If this accidental style is applied to a Staff, it will apply > > to all staves within the enclosing PianoStaff or GrandStaff"? > > It would be nice to reword this passage. "If this > accidental style is applied to a Staff" does not > exactly reflect what is happening, though: the > accidental style never goes through the Staff, but > jumps to the GrandStaff directly. In other words, > > \accidentalStyle piano > > is equivalent to > > \accidentalStyle GrandStaff.piano > > whereas > > \accidentalStyle default > > is the same as > > \accidentalStyle Staff.default > > How to phrase this in a way that would make it > clear to you?
When I looked at the paragraph in question: "This accidental style applies to the current GrandStaff or PianoStaff by default" I wasn't immediately clear about what "default" implied, particularly as "default" is also the defined name of one of the types of automatic accidental style being discussed in this section. (There are references to the name "default" scattered throughout the section.) So I would suggest that the wording be made more explicit: "This accidental style applies to the current GrandStaff or PianoStaff unless qualified in scope with a second argument." Ditto for: "This accidental style applies to the current ChoirStaff unless qualified in scope with a second argument." I would also suggest changing the paragraph near the start of the section to eliminate "default" there as well: "The accidental style normally applies to the current Staff (with the exception of the styles choral, ← this addition was overlooked piano and piano-cautionary, which are explained below). Optionally, the function can take a second argument that determines in which scope the style should be changed. For example, …" Cheers, David.
