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

[Graham Percival]

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 12:11:14 -0300
"Han-Wen Nienhuys" <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 8:44 AM, Valentin Villenave
> <address@hidden> wrote:
> > 2008/7/27 Reinhold Kainhofer <address@hidden>:
> >
> >> What do you think? I'd vote for \octavation, which is also closer
> >> to the deprecated #(set-octavation ...).
> >
> > I'd say that \octavation is a bit long to type (though much shorter
> > than #(set-octavation)). I'd vote for a very very short command such
> > as \oct (but I somehow guess I'll be alone on this one :-)
> 
> that does not make much sense for such an infrequently used command.

Definitely.  I mean, we've just gone through a whole painful round
of renaming commands to make them more clear (like \octave to
\octaveCheck).  I think that \octavation or \ottava is the way go
go here.

Cheers,
- Graham