"Vicente Solsona" <[email protected]> writes:
> On Thu, 04 Nov 2010 05:07:34 +0100, Colin Campbell <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>> please remember to forward to the list.
>>> also please review your examples before posting. your example contains
>>> syntax errors.
>>>
>>> there's no E flat in your example. the only common note between voices 2
>>> and 4 is an F (if I've interpreted your example correctly). Here's how I
>>> would "mix" that F (result attached):
>>
>> I believe the OP was using english.ly for note names, so the common note
>> is in fact an E-flat, spelt ef rather than es in the default nederlands
>> note names.
>
> heck you're right. there's a thing called english which happens to be a
> language which happens to be supported by lilypond (and probably even
> there's someone out there who happens to speak it)
I'd say there is no point in providing different input languages. On
the other hand, it would look plain ugly to spell a well-known fugue
theme as { bes a c b } rather than using German note names.
It might be argued on that grounds that German note names should be
canonical: I know of no other note name language that has been employed
similarly for silly acronyms and word games.
Well, almost. When writing ut queant laxis
<URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ut_queant_laxis>, French note names
would be more appropriate. Oh, we don't have them. The Italian note
names use "do" rather than "ut". I have a Swiss accordion score from
1933 here, and it uses "ut" throughout. Maybe it's just Swiss French,
or obsolete Swiss French.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
