> Under this premise, I think it makes sense to inherit the key signature. > Now if we have _within_ a voice << { xxx } \\ { yyy } >>, what does this > mean? Since the purpose of "voice" accidental style is to write stuff > that several different people read, this corresponds to splitting a > tenor voice (for example). This means that the split voices should not > just inherit the key signature, but also already preexisting accidentals > of the "father voice" since obviously the same persons are singing tenor > 1 and tenor 2 that have been singing tenor previously. Also, any > accidental changes within xxx and yyy need to be consolidated into the > following rejoined voice: if there are different accidentals in xxx and > yyy for a note, a recurrence of the note after the split needs a > cautionary accidental.
Good point. So this would not be the case for voice style (apart from heriting the key signature) but for modern-voice it would be OK as the cancellation is at Staff context. Frédéric _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond