[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Three questions for ancient.itely
From: |
Eyolf Østrem |
Subject: |
Three questions for ancient.itely |
Date: |
Wed, 24 Sep 2008 19:55:49 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.17-muttng (2007-11-01) |
I'm working on the docs for ancient music, and I've come across a number of
things that relate not primarily to the documentation, but to the program
itself:
1. Is there a good reason why it takes the monstruous
\override Staff.Accidental #'glyph-name-alist =
#alteration-mensural-glyph-name-alist
to change the Accidental style of a piece, in contrast to the
simple syntax for time signature and clef styles? Heck, even the flag style
can be changed with a simple setting...
IIRC, it used to be much simpler -- why this change? Any chance of a \set
syntax?
2. One of the "known issues" under flags states:
The attachment of ancient flags to stems is slightly off due to a
change in early 2.3.x.
About time to fix that, is it...?
3. The form "Episem" is used, both as a lilypond command and in the
documentation text. Since it's not really a medieval concept at all, but a
term invented by the Solesmes monks when plainchant was revised/-vived in
the late nineteenth century, it is not an established term in any language
other than french, where it is episeme (and it doesn't appear neither in
Merriam-Webster nor in the full OED). If anything, Episem is the german
form. I would strongly recommend going with the latinized greek "episema",
which is what the Vatican editions have.
This may be too small a matter to merit a change in the lilypond code, but
I intend to change to episema in the documentation text, unless there are
strong objections to it.
Eyolf
--
Mate, this parrot wouldn't VOOM if you put four million volts through it!
-- Monty Python
- Three questions for ancient.itely,
Eyolf Østrem <=