On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Dan Eble<d...@faithful.be> wrote:
> Doesn't this mix up meaning and appearance? What will you do when people
> come asking for LargeStaff, TinyStaff, LittleGreenStaff (for Martian music),
> and so forth?
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Alexander Kobel<n...@a-kobel.de> wrote:
> Oh, and by the way... No experience for this on my side, but are there
> scores with small rhythmic or drum staffs? Then we should probably also have
> a SmallRhythmicStaff, SmallDrumStaff, SmallVaticanaStaff and so on, right?
Hmm... I agree that it wouldn't make sense to define versions for
every different size (or color :) ) and to define resized versions of
every staff type out there. A global variable would probably work for
the size problem, but it's still somewhat ugly to have a version for
every staff type. The the generic "SmallStaff" is probably the most
common case though. So what do you think? Should the "SmallStaff" just
be left as a snippet?
If it is a snippet ideally I'd want to do something like:
\include "small_staff.lyi"
\score {
\new SmallStaff {...}
}
How would one make small_staff.lyi so this worked? This way it would
be bundled with the other global variables. The only way I found was
to do this:
small_staff.lyi
=====
\context {
\Score
\accepts "SmallStaff"
}
\context {
\Staff
\type "Engraver_group"
\name "SmallStaff"
\alias "Staff"
fontSize = #-3
\override StaffSymbol #'staff-space = #(magstep -3)
}
=====
other.ly
=====
\score {
\new SmallStaff {...}
\layout { \include "small_staff.lyi" }
}
=====
-----Jay
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
