Re: minor chords

[David Kastrup]

Kieren MacMillan <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi Simon (et al.),
>
>> I think this is one of the few questions where it’s really difficult
>> to establish a standard.
>
> Agreed.
> It’s the one big disappointment that I have in Gould’s engraving book:
> she doesn’t even address the subject at all!!
>
>> Plus: there’s still some leap between the lilypond standard output –
>> which one may usually take as „standard” indeed – and other options
>> which are available if one looks for them.
>
> I’ve always found the Lilypond chord names default(s) to be totally
> unacceptable; I have a ChordNames.ly standard include, which changes
> font, size, placement,

Well, font needs to be readily available on default installations.
Which does not mean that the current choice is the best even given that
constraint.

I'll readily agree that the default is awful.

> and contains an almost complete rewrite of the chord symbols.

The naming scheme is probably not up to debates all that much (probably
partly because of compatibility considerations) but that does not mean
that one cannot offer alternatives.

All in all chord names seem like an area where you have a good chance of
not meeting lots of resistance for getting improvements accepted into
LilyPond.

-- 
David Kastrup