On Jan 21, 2020, at 14:02, Carl Sorensen <c_soren...@byu.edu> wrote:
> \new ChoirStaff = choir <<
> \new Staff = choir.upper <<
> \new Voice = choir.upper.soprano
> \new Voice = choir.upper.alto
>>>
> \new Staff = choir.lower <<
> \new Voice = choir.lower.tenor
> \new Voice = choir.lower.bass
>>>
>>>
>
> Or would we prefer
>
> \new ChoirStaff = choir <<
> \new Staff = choir.upper <<
> \new Voice = choir.soprano
> \new Voice = choir.alto
>>>
> \new Staff = choir.lower <<
> \new Voice = choir.tenor
> \new Voice = choir.bass
>>>
>>>
>
> The first example is potentially problematic, because Voices can change
> Staffs (and even StaffGroups), so it seems that having the Voice id include
> the Staff is not desirable.
I don't think anyone was suggesting that a context ID would include the IDs of
its parents as a substring. At least I wasn't trying to suggest that. The
idea is that something like this:
\context foo.bar.baz { … }
Could be interpreted as shorthand for this:
\context %{ unspecified %} = foo {
\context %{ unspecified %} = bar {
\context %{ unspecified %} = baz { … }
}
}
—
Dan
