> Okay, technically true… However, > > 1. To most people, [image] counts as a type of “indentation”, given > that the instrument names come in the white space.
But it definitely is *not* indentation. IMHO we should not mix up technical terms. I repeat: An indentation in the sense of LilyPond is a *fixed* value that is not dependent on the music! This is not the case for your example. > Accomplishing this is difficult in Lilypond, especially if you need > a system start delimiter for the “late-entrance” instruments. I haven't checked the tracker, but it might be worth to open another issue for this particular, distinct feature, where the amount of music in one stave should determine the delayed start of another stave. > 2. There are lots of Stockhausen pieces with truly non-standard > indentation (e.g. Klavierstück XI). Well... This is a bunch of completely independent fragments that are rather freely distributed on a very large sheet of paper. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/e/e6/Stockhausen-klavierst%C3%BCck-XI-Score-Scaled.jpg There is one fragment consisting of two systems (on the lower right), with the second system indented. LilyPond can do that. AFAICS, the layout of ‘Klavierstück XI’ could be realized with `\score` markups. > 3. As an educator, it’s a LOT easier to generate certain > exercises/examples with pseudoIndent than with multiple scores > and/or score-in-markup. Agreed. Note that I'm not opposing to the idea of individually indenting systems. I only want to make sure that we are not mixing up terminology. > 4. In operas and musicals, there are often big blobs of text > (dialogue, stage directions, etc.) that need to be inserted to the > left of a given system of music, mid-piece. Yeah, this sounds like the feature we are talking about :-) Werner
