Re: convert-ly produces invalid output for KeySignature.c0-position

[David Kastrup]

Pavel Roskin <address@hidden> writes:

> Quoting David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
>
>> Small wonder.  I thought our default use of symbols matched our naming
>> rules, but that one's an exception.
>>
>> We can make an exception for convert-ly here, but that's not a
>> satisfactorily final solution.
>>
>> I propose renaming it.  Suggestions?
>
> I'm fine with renaming.  We have Staff.middleCPosition.  Perhaps the
> same name could be used in KeySignature.
>
> On the other hand, we don't care where the _middle_ C is positioned.
> We only need to know where _some_ C is positioned to decide how to
> print the key signature.  Then "middle" could be dropped.
>
> By the way, setting KeySignature.c0-position with \override doesn't
> work.  I had to resort to setting it in Scheme:

Given the analysis in a longer mail, I revert my opinion that we need to
do something here.  c0-position for the relevant grobs _can't_ be set by
overrides or tweaks.  Renaming it to middleCPosition would likely cause
more confusion.  What _is_ wrong is that the Internals Reference calls
it a user property: as far as I can see, it is for internal use only.
The question is where this distinction is established.

-- 
David Kastrup