On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > when I get the time, I will look at what is there and what's wrong. I also > > think we need to have a discussion anyways about what "system"(s) we want > > I don't think we need more discussion. We've had plenty of > discussions, and nothing conclusive seems to come out, because > everyone has a different idea of how chords must to look. What we need > is some solid and tweakable code.
And some clean and consequent definitions. They might reflect one persons likings, but that's better than trying to make everybody happy with one definition. BTW: are you suggesting that something besides the scheme defs is broken? -- peace, love & harmony Atte _______________________________________________ Lilypond-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
