Re: HaraKiri in PianoStaff

[John Galbraith]

   The HaraKiriStaff doesn't exist as a separate \context type.
   When you say \translator { \HaraKiriStaffContext } you simply
   redefine the ordinary Staff contexts. If you want to get a 
   clearer idea of how the different contexts are defined, you
   could take a look at ly/engraver.ly.

OK, so I tried adding 

    \translator {
      \HaraKiriStaffContext
      \name AuxillaryStaff
      }
    \translator {
      \PianoStaffContext
      \accepts AuxillaryStaff  
    }

to my paper block.  This does get me a lot closer.  There are in fact
two staves where there need to be and only a single one otherwise.
The biggest problem now is that the "down" Auxillarystaff (bass clef)
always appears on top (instead of the main treble clef staff which you
would expect to see).   In addition, the treble clef music is set in
bass clef.  Actually, the problem might not be ordering the staves but
that the \clef command operates on the wrong staff.  I tried changing
the order around of various things and playing with \accept Staff and
\accept AuxillaryStaff in different orders but that doesn't make any
difference.

Secondly, these are weird HaraKiri staves because they stop and start
with the music, not with systems.  In other words, the staff is
totally blank for a portion of the system, and then appears or
disappears in the middle.  The appearance always occurs where I have a
manual staff swich (\translator Staff = down or whatever).  This is
rather like a style in which some 20th century music is written that
prefers blank space over staves full of rests.  However, it is not the
standard notation even though some composers may prefer it.  (I don't
think that lilypond is actually expressing an opinion on the matter, I
am just describing how it looks.)

Finally, the spacing between the staves is really wide.  Actually, it
looks like you could put a third staff right in between the (reversed)
treble and bass clef staves.

Thanks Mats,
       John