Re: The limits of StaffGroup nesting

2005-11-14 Thread Erik Sandberg
On Monday 14 November 2005 02.10, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: Erik Sandberg wrote: On 11/12/05, Han-Wen Nienhuys [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Trevor Bača wrote: So, both for ease of implementation -- and because actual composers seem to bar and bracket things quite arbitrarily -- maybe the request

Re: The limits of StaffGroup nesting

2005-11-14 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
Erik Sandberg wrote: Then, how does this make it possible to drop InnerXX contexts? There must still be one individual StaffGroup-ish context definition for each level of context nesting? What's the point in context nesting, except for being able to nest brackets? -- Han-Wen Nienhuys -

Re: The limits of StaffGroup nesting

2005-11-13 Thread Erik Sandberg
On 11/12/05, Han-Wen Nienhuys [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Trevor Bača wrote: So, both for ease of implementation -- and because actual composers seem to bar and bracket things quite arbitrarily -- maybe the request shouldn't be for arbitrarily nested contexts, but instead to free up

Re: The limits of StaffGroup nesting

2005-11-13 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
Erik Sandberg wrote: On 11/12/05, Han-Wen Nienhuys [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Trevor Bača wrote: So, both for ease of implementation -- and because actual composers seem to bar and bracket things quite arbitrarily -- maybe the request shouldn't be for arbitrarily nested contexts, but instead

Re: The limits of StaffGroup nesting

2005-11-12 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
Trevor Bača wrote: Han-Wen, if arbitrarily deep StaffGroup nesting isn't currently possible would you consider adding it to the LSD sponsor page? It would be neat to have arbitrary nesting, but it doesn't jibe well with how contexts are created, as Erik also mentioned. I'll have a think to

Re: The limits of StaffGroup nesting

2005-11-12 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
Trevor Bača wrote: So, both for ease of implementation -- and because actual composers seem to bar and bracket things quite arbitrarily -- maybe the request shouldn't be for arbitrarily nested contexts, but instead to free up barring and bracketting as independent tasks from each other. Dunno,

Re: The limits of StaffGroup nesting

2005-11-12 Thread Trevor Bača
On 11/12/05, Han-Wen Nienhuys [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Trevor Bača wrote: So, both for ease of implementation -- and because actual composers seem to bar and bracket things quite arbitrarily -- maybe the request shouldn't be for arbitrarily nested contexts, but instead to free up barring

The limits of StaffGroup nesting

2005-11-11 Thread Trevor Bača
Large orchestral scores sometimes nest StaffGroups fairly deeply. The Rite of Spring has some stuff in the winds, with, for example, flutes spread over four staves in the following way: piccolo getting its own staff; 2 C flutes, each getting a staff and grouped together in a staff group; alto

Re: The limits of StaffGroup nesting

2005-11-11 Thread Erik Sandberg
On Friday 11 November 2005 23.25, Trevor Bača wrote: The InnerStaffGroup system start bracket needs manual nudging to the left, but both brackets are present around the expected staves. Adding another InnerStaffGroup doesn't do what we might expect, however: The type of a context can never