Re: Fwd: [PATCH] Re: Octavation syntax consistency

[Reinhold Kainhofer]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Am Donnerstag, 24. Juli 2008 schrieb Graham Percival:
> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 23:32:08 +0200
> > > Shouldn't that really be \octave #x since other commands are in
> > > English?
> >
> > Probably yes, but lilypond had already an \octave function, which
> > performed an octave check. It was only renamed to \octaveCheck a few
> > days ago, so I don't want to reuse that function name yet. Otherwise
> > legacy .ly files might run into problems.
>
> The term "ottava" is well-understood in English.  I didn't even
> realize the term was originally German...
>
> I suppose we could use "\octavation" instead, though.

Before I commit, I'd like to sort out the naming issue: 
- -) \octave is somehow ruled out by the old \octave (check) function
- -) \ottava is inconsistent with the other (English) commands (and to me 
somehow sounds like absolute, not relative octavation)
- -) \octavation sounds good to me

What do you think? I'd vote for \octavation, which is also closer to the 
deprecated #(set-octavation ...).
Renaming before the commit is really easy (I'll just search and replace in the 
patch before applying).

Cheers,
Reinhold
- -- 
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
Reinhold Kainhofer, Vienna University of Technology, Austria
email: address@hidden, http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/
 * Financial and Actuarial Mathematics, TU Wien, http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/
 * K Desktop Environment, http://www.kde.org, KOrganizer maintainer
 * Chorvereinigung "Jung-Wien", http://www.jung-wien.at/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIjE3oTqjEwhXvPN0RArlkAJ4qBm9cyCajLZEowIeoFbLNY3EUYwCfU/Ty
KMvuwHzio7otU+GSZbui6XE=
=fgYk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----