Re: suggestion: change OctavateEight name to ClefTransposition - opinions?

[David Kastrup]

Marc Hohl <address@hidden> writes:

> Am 05.04.2013 23:02, schrieb Janek Warchoł:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The name "OctavateEight" doesn't have any sense - it doesn't show that
>> this grob is related to the clef, and anyway the clef can be
>> "transposed" by any amount, not just an octave.
>> I suggest to rename this grob to ClefTransposition or something
>> similar (since this is not strictly transposition, it may be best to
>> use a slightly different name... ClefShift? At any rate,
>> ClefOctavation would make much more sense than OctavateEight).
>> We can also change names of some related context properties, for
>> example clefOctavation, clefOctavationStyle etc.  My only worry is
>> that they may become too similar (clefTransposition and
>> ClefTransposition).
>> Thoughts?
>
> +1
>
> I'd prefer ClefTransposition over ClefShift, since the latter
> implies some shift relative to the clef's default position.

I think I'd like ClefModifier.  Something like

    `clefOctavation' (integer)
          Add this much extra octavation.  Values of 7 and -7 are
          common.

does not make sense.  Transposition is not really accurate since the
number is in steps rather than diatonic.  It is a bit disconcerting that
values of 7, -7, 14 and -14 lead to numbers 8, 8, 15 and 15.

I don't find "shift" all too bad: one can talk about pitch shifting
after all, and for spatial displacements we tend to use "offset".

-- 
David Kastrup