Pavel Roskin <pro...@gnu.org> writes:
> On Sun, 06 May 2012 10:34:24 +0200
> David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>> Quick: tell me what you would expect without too much thinking
>> (imagine you are a naive user) from the following:
>>
>> \new Staff <<
>> \relative c'' { c4 d e f s1*0-\markup Oops c d e f g1 } \\
>
> A spacer 1 unit wide and 0 units high.
>
>> \relative c' { c4 d e f <>-\markup Wow c d e f g1 }
>
> A rhombus.
>
> I'm fine with whatever works for now, but please keep in mind that
> Lilypond it written not just for programmers.
I have not yet seen a proposal that would be more suitable for
non-programmers. The counterproposal from the "don't let programmers
take over" is not to let users know about the ready availability of this
construct. I consider that inappropriate.
I tried discussing using "< >" in the documentation vs the possibly
stranger looking "<>". Which more or less is the same to programmers,
but might make a difference in strangeness to those of the
non-programming faction. However, there has been no feedback whatsoever
on this proposal.
I'll probably take a look to see what it takes to require nothing at all
before explicit postevents. It will likely cause some surprises in
behavior. And of course, it will not be backward compatible.
It is likely that this is not feasible. But maybe at least trying will
serve to convince some people that I am not out to turn LilyPond into
something only useful to programmers.
I will definitely not prepare any patch informing users of the currently
existing feature for an explicit empty chord. It has been made
abundantly clear to me that there is significant opposition from people
important to the well-being of LilyPond.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
