[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: renaming "vertical spacing inside systems" props
From: |
Mark Polesky |
Subject: |
Re: renaming "vertical spacing inside systems" props |
Date: |
Wed, 3 Nov 2010 13:49:17 -0700 (PDT) |
Renaming proposals, round 3 (listed below).
Trevor Daniels wrote:
> But is this really strictly top-down directional, or does
> this apply even when the nonstaff is below the staff?
Perhaps you missed the initial post?
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-10/msg00599.html
Mind you, the terms have already changed alot, but you get
the idea:
> Except for the 'inside-staffgroup property, the names of
> these properties follow the format "item1-item2-spacing".
> Note that item2 is not necessarily below item1; for
> example, 'loose-staff-spacing will measure upwards from
> the loose line if 'staff-affinity = #UP.
Trevor wrote:
> I wonder if affinity/nonaffinity are optimal. Are they
> better than relatedstaff/unrelatedstaff?
Or target/opposite, reference/opposite, refstaff/oppstaff?
Actually, now I really like refstaff/oppstaff:
nonstaff-refstaff-spacing
nonstaff-nonstaff-spacing
nonstaff-oppstaff-spacing
> So my preference is for [groupedstaff-groupedstaff].
Trevor, after some consideration, I'm afraid I'm not so much
in favor of groupedstaff-groupedstaff (or it's shorter
cousin). They too strongly suggest the possibility of this:
[last staff of group] - [first staff of next group]
Carl Sorensen wrote:
> I just thought of a c': within-group-staff-staff. Longer,
> but might explain it more clearly.
It would be the longest, but I like the clarity. How do you
feel about
staffgrouped-staff-staff-spacing ?
It's the same length as
within-group-staff-staff-spacing
but it has one less hyphen, which for some reason I consider
an advantage. Although I might prefer within-group anyway.
Now, if we do use
within-group-staff-staff-spacing
I thought we might as well shorten
staffgroup-staff-spacing
to
group-staff-spacing .
What do you think?
- Mark
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Renaming proposals, round 3:
CURRENT NAME PROPOSED NAME
------------ -------------
next-staff staff-staff
default-next-staff default-staff-staff
inter-staff nonstaff-refstaff
inter-loose-line nonstaff-nonstaff
non-affinity nonstaff-oppstaff
between-staff within-group-staff-staff
after-last-staff group-staff
- Re: renaming "vertical spacing inside systems" props, Jean-Charles Malahieude, 2010/11/01
- Re: renaming "vertical spacing inside systems" props, Mark Polesky, 2010/11/02
- Re: renaming "vertical spacing inside systems" props, Carl Sorensen, 2010/11/02
- Re: renaming "vertical spacing inside systems" props, Trevor Daniels, 2010/11/02
- Re: renaming "vertical spacing inside systems" props,
Mark Polesky <=
- Re: renaming "vertical spacing inside systems" props, Jan Warchoł, 2010/11/03
- Re: renaming "vertical spacing inside systems" props, Carl Sorensen, 2010/11/03
- Re: renaming "vertical spacing inside systems" props, Trevor Daniels, 2010/11/03
- Re: renaming "vertical spacing inside systems" props, Valentin Villenave, 2010/11/03
- Re: renaming "vertical spacing inside systems" props, Jan Warchoł, 2010/11/04
- Re: renaming "vertical spacing inside systems" props, Trevor Daniels, 2010/11/04