Re: Translation string problem

[Carl D. Sorensen]

On 12/9/08 6:12 PM, "Francisco Vila" <address@hidden> wrote:

> 2008/12/10 Graham Percival <address@hidden>:
>> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 01:47:29AM +0100, Francisco Vila wrote:
>>> 2008/12/10 Graham Percival <address@hidden>:
>>>> Sweet Mao no.  That's horrible.  We should *NOT* do this.
>>> 
>>> This hack would be advertised in a @c omment and not used anywhere
>>> else, only here.
>> 
>> In one (1) single example?
> 
> Yes, because the problem is that explicitly created staves have to be
> given English names 'up' and 'down' if they are to be used for the
> autochange feature. This is illustrated with a single example in NR
> 2.2.1 after the warning Trevor wrote yesterday.

Seems to me that to avoid this problem we should never have LilyPond names
that are standard English words.

I think we should change the defined names "up" and "down" to "upperStaff"
and "lowerStaff" or something like that.  Those names would be less
confusing than "up" and "down", and wouldn't be subject to translation,
because they're not English words.

Carl