On Monday 14 November 2005 02.10, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Erik Sandberg wrote:
> >>On 11/12/05, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>Trevor Bača wrote:
> >>>>So, both for ease of implementation -- and because actual composers
> >>>>seem to bar and bracket things quite arbitrarily -- maybe the request
> >>>>shouldn't be for arbitrarily nested contexts, but instead to free up
> >>>>barring and bracketting as independent tasks from each other. Dunno,
> >>>>but something to think about when it comes time to add to the sponsor
> >>>>page.
> >>>
> >>>Yes, this seems sensible.
> >
> > Does this mean that cycles will be allowed in the graph of context
> > definitions?
>
> No, it means that we don't mirror bracket nesting in context nesting.
Then, how does this make it possible to drop InnerXX contexts? There must
still be one individual StaffGroup-ish context definition for each level of
context nesting?
Currenntly, the following trick can be applied to achieve arbitrarily deep
nesting. In what way will this be simplified?
\score {
\new OuterStaffGroup <<
\new StaffGroup <<
\new InnerStaffGroup << \new Staff c1 \new Staff c1 >>
\new Staff c1
>>
\new Staff c1
>>
\layout {
\context {
\StaffGroup
\name OuterStaffGroup
\accepts "StaffGroup"
}
\context {\Score \accepts "OuterStaffGroup" }
}
}
--
Erik
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
