[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: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 13:56:08 -0700 (PDT)

(trying to make this as painless as possible...)

Renaming proposals, round 2:

------------       -------------
next-staff         staff-staff
default-next-staff default-staff-staff

inter-staff        nonstaff-staff
inter-loose-line   nonstaff-nonstaff
non-affinity       nonstaff-nonaffinity

between-staff      (see below)
after-last-staff   staffgroup-staff

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


1) "nonstaff" beat out "loose" by a large margin.
   Sorry Carl!  (:

2) all the ideas for "between-staff" so far:
   * names consistent with the item1-item2 format
     a) groupstaff-groupstaff       (Trevor)
     b) groupedstaff-groupedstaff   (Trevor)
     c) grouped-staff-staff         (Mark)

   * shorter names
     d) inside-staffgroup           (Mark)
     e) grouped-staff               (Carl)
     f) grouped-staves              (Carl)

Should we vote on this?  I'd vote for either c or f.  Here
are some of my observations.

First group, with consistent names:

The problem with a and b is that they might suggest "between
the last staff of one staffgroup and the first staff of the
next staffgroup".

The problem with c is that "grouped-staff-staff" might be
misread as "groupedstaff-staff".  Personally, I think this
is a smaller problem than the others.


Second group, with shorter names:

The problem with d is that it might suggest that non-staff
lines are involved, instead of just staves.

The problem with e is that it might suggest that it could
apply after the last staff of a staffgroup.

I think that f has none of these problems.

Thanks for your input.
- Mark


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]