Le 28/11/2022 à 20:27, Jean Abou Samra a écrit :
The other piece of brainstorming I know about, although I didn’t chase all the discussions in the devel mailing list, is the GSoC patch. This has the same goal of making it easier to coerce LilyPond into formatting chord names the way you want, but does so with a different approach: remember the detailsof how the chord was entered in \chordmode, so that the chord formatting is closer to the input. Compared to just adding chord symbols with \markup, that has the advantage that LilyPond understands what the chords are actually made of, and the disadvantage that it can still be cumbersome to teach LilyPond how to format the chords the way you want.I don't typeset chord names myself, I don't really know how strong the arguments are for each side. Maybe there's a place for both, maybe not. At any rate, as opposed to the chord semantics GSoC approach, it would be rather straightforward implementation-wise to make LilyPond understand arbitrary chord symbols, as shown in the code from my original reply.
Amusingly, I found this post from 2001: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-music-discuss/2001-03/msg00327.html (The thread continues here: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-music-discuss/2001-04/msg00000.html)
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
