On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 03:06:31 -0700, Brian Barker <[email protected]>
wrote:
At 23:41 28/08/2014 -0700, Keith OHara wrote:
The suggestion quoted below from the bug-lilypond list
<http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2014-08/msg00037.html>
makes sense to me, as an addition to the \language "english" note-names.
It would not fit in German-style pitch-names, where 'cis' and 'ces'
get completely distinct names from 'c'.
Sorry, but I don't see the distinction you are trying to make between
German and English. Surely C, C-sharp, and C-flat (and for that
matter -double sharp and -double flat) have separate names in any
language, including German, English, German Lilypond, and English Lilypond?
In English the names use two parts, noun-adjective, which allows the construction
"C-natural". German has single words (ces c cis) for the pitches, and these are distinct
from the names for the alterations (Be, AuflösungZeichen, Kreuz). English speakers use
"C-natural" to name the pitch in contexts where the key has sharped the scale-step C.
After entering "cn" in, say, D major,
one would readily fall into the trap of using "c" in the next bar
where "cis" (or "cs") was actually meant and required.
The feature-request implicitly assumed, based on experience, that such errors
already happen. Anyone using, for example, ABC notation had developed the
habit of typing 'C' for the pitch at scale-step C in the key.
The distinct naming was suggested as a way to help us more efficiently correct
those errors.
Would the ability to enter 'cn', or a note in the "Languages" table saying "In
English 'cn' is an alternative to 'c' to denote the pitch C-natural", actually increase the
rate of forgetting the 's' in 'cs' ?
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
