Hi Koen, > I still think it could be nice to try to write a longer-term solution.
There has been a lot of work done on chord naming over the last decade, mainly as part of a Google Summer of Code project a few years ago, but essentially none of it has yet navigated through the patch submission process. There are lots of people who think it would be nice to write a long-term solution — it just keeps getting stalled (for various reasons). <sigh> > Do you think there would be any interest in specifying the chord suffixes > like that, directly from markup? Not sure if I can speak for anyone else, but my interest is (and has always been) in having a robust, unified system with a clean UI that handles most (if not all) of the main use cases. > in the specific use case of printing a harmonic background, the layer of > calculating chords from internal pitches is redundant anyway. There are many > ways to think about a chord, and I change the way I think about them all the > time: I just want to write it down and I don't need LilyPond to reason about > it. :) (Although a root and a bass note are still useful.) Make sure you’re up to speed on what’s been done in this area, since some of the groundwork may be complete. And of course there are good reasons that Lilypond has the calculating chords layer — the thing we all want (I think?) is to add functionality without losing what’s already there! Cheers, Kieren.
