On 2/12/21, 9:40 AM, "lilypond-user on behalf of David Kastrup"
<lilypond-user-bounces+carl.d.sorensen=gmail....@gnu.org on behalf of
d...@gnu.org> wrote:
Carl Sorensen <c_soren...@byu.edu> writes:
> It seems to me like a ChoirStaff is a special kind of StaffGroup that
> is not intended to have tablature associated with it.
>
> Wouldn’t the better approach be to have the user create a new custom
> StaffGroup?
Singers with lute are not untypical for a Renaissance ensemble. At any
rate, LilyPond's job description does not really include fighting
imprudent typesetting choices with baffling behavior.
I agree with this. We should try in every case not to be baffling.
"Are you sure you want ..." is a usage rather than a programming
question.
> One of the strengths of LilyPond is keeping appropriate semantics in
> the input files.
But not by ejecting its stomach in the users' faces when it doesn't like
what they want.
> I don’t think ChoirStaff is the appropriate semantics for a StaffGroup
> containing a traditional music staff and a tablature staff.
But the user is not asking you to do the typesetting, but LilyPond.
I agree.
Should ChoirStaff accept all Staff contexts then? DrumStaff, RhythmicStaff,
TabStaff?
I guess if we are consistent and say any kind of staff can be included in a
ChoirStaff, so that a ChoirStaff is just a StaffGroup with a particular kind of
start bracket, then my concern is minimized.
Thanks,
Carl
--
David Kastrup
