Re: Why no review on Doc: NR 1.6.2 - Staff Symbol?

[Carl Sorensen]

On 12/3/11 7:38 AM, "David Kastrup" <address@hidden> wrote:

>James <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Nothing sinister about it, and am happy to revert it but don't
>> understand why this is bad. Sure the new example is much 'simpler'
>> than having  write all the \new Staff { with }, especially when I as a
>> LP user want to write single system scores where I would probably
>> never ever use \new Staff { \with.
>
>You apparently did not read what I wrote.  The new example _does_ _not_
>_work_ in standalone contexts.

Actually, if you follow the instructions in the Learning Manual, it _does_
work.

See the Learning Manual, section 1.4.1 Omitted material, which explains
that snippets from the documentation need to be enclosed in {} or
\relative {}.


{
  \override Staff.StaffSymbol #'line-count = #3
  {d4 d d d}
}

works just fine.


>
>And anyway, using music overrides instead of context modifications is
>_asking_ _for_ _trouble_ here since the overrides take only effect at a
>certain _musical_ moment.  And that moment may already be too late for
>proper typesetting.

This argument seems to me to be the salient argument here.  Properties
that should affect an entire context are better placed in a context
modification.

The code below shows this clearly:

{d4
  \override Staff.StaffSymbol #'line-count = #3
\bar " " \break
  d d d}

will result in two lines with 5-line staves, not one 5-line staff and one
3-line staff.

So I think I agree that the simplification should not be made.

Thanks,

Carl

>