Re: [frogs] Re: format-mark-* Was: \set vs \override

2009-12-02 Thread Graham Percival
On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 03:41:06PM -0700, Carl Sorensen wrote: > > On 12/2/09 2:58 PM, "Mats Bengtsson" wrote: > > >> Because it's too many things to list in the body of the NR. We try to keep > >> the body of the NR as short as feasible, and put exhaustive lists in the > >> appendices. > >>

Re: [frogs] Re: format-mark-* Was: \set vs \override

2009-12-02 Thread Carl Sorensen
On 12/2/09 2:58 PM, "Mats Bengtsson" wrote: > Carl Sorensen wrote: >> >> On 12/2/09 1:40 PM, "Mats Bengtsson" wrote: >> >> >>> Why not simply extend the current example so that it shows all the >>> possibilities? No need to explain in words, especially since the names >>> are more or less

Re: [frogs] Re: format-mark-* Was: \set vs \override

2009-12-02 Thread Mats Bengtsson
Carl Sorensen wrote: On 12/2/09 1:40 PM, "Mats Bengtsson" wrote: Why not simply extend the current example so that it shows all the possibilities? No need to explain in words, especially since the names are more or less self-explanatory. Because it's too many things to list in the b

Re: [frogs] Re: format-mark-* Was: \set vs \override

2009-12-02 Thread Carl Sorensen
On 12/2/09 1:40 PM, "Mats Bengtsson" wrote: > Why not simply extend the current example so that it shows all the > possibilities? No need to explain in words, especially since the names > are more or less self-explanatory. Because it's too many things to list in the body of the NR. We try to

Re: [frogs] Re: format-mark-* Was: \set vs \override

2009-12-02 Thread Mats Bengtsson
Why not simply extend the current example so that it shows all the possibilities? No need to explain in words, especially since the names are more or less self-explanatory. /Mats Valentin Villenave wrote: On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote: Doing this right probably

Re: [frogs] Re: format-mark-* Was: \set vs \override

2009-12-02 Thread Valentin Villenave
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote: > Doing this right probably means a careful explanation of a few of these in > the NR, and an appendix showing all of the possibilities. I was about to suggest something like that, but aren't appendices automatically generated? How would you im

Re: [frogs] Re: format-mark-* Was: \set vs \override

2009-12-02 Thread Carl Sorensen
On 12/2/09 2:47 AM, "Valentin Villenave" wrote: > On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:04 AM, Mats Bengtsson > wrote: >> Running the command "grep format-mark- scm/translation-functions.scm" in >> Linux gives the following list of functions: >> >> (define-public (format-mark-alphabet mark context) >> (d

Re: format-mark-* Was: \set vs \override

2009-12-02 Thread Valentin Villenave
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:04 AM, Mats Bengtsson wrote: > Running the command "grep format-mark- scm/translation-functions.scm" in > Linux gives the following list of functions: > > (define-public (format-mark-alphabet mark context) > (define-public (format-mark-box-alphabet mark context) > (define-

format-mark-* Was: \set vs \override

2009-12-02 Thread Mats Bengtsson
Anthony W. Youngman wrote: \set Score.markFormatter = #format-mark-alphabet == Following up a bit late, I know ... If you look back at when format-mark-alphabet first appeared, you'll find I featured prominently (and ineptly :-) I wanted the