Re: [Groff] Foxley roff music notes of 1987

[Grigoriy A. Sitkarev]

Hello, list!

08.02.2013 12:55, Werner LEMBERG пишет:
> > As a longtime lilypond user, I'm in inclined to agree with Werner's
> > implication (I hope I'm not misreading!).  Lilypond is so good
> > there's not much point in using anything else.
>
> I won't go that far, but looking at the documentation of the `music'
> preprocessor it is clear that Lilypond is far superior.  I suspect
> that `music' doesn't support multiple staves or multiple voices.

I am not competent in these topics, but `music' somehow attracted my 
attention, because I was very interested and curious in the way scores 
can be typesetted using troff engine. Most of all the language it 
proposed raised an interest, not its typographic features, since I 
understand that troff can do placement of right glyphs at the right 
places and draw lines, if the user requests them in the right order :-)

One interesting thing about Foxley worth noting: it seems that 
typesetting was not their primary goal. They wanted to analyse tunes 
with statistical methods (clustering, distribution and so on), while 
obtaining printable papers looks like a side-effect of their research 
and a nice add-on to the package.

This might be the reason it is not advanced as Lilypond.

> > (Mind you, I have of late been seduced by the charms of a WYSIWYG
> > score editor called Musescore.)
>
> :-)  I much prefer Lilypond's text input for all my works.

No doubt, Lilypond is much superior and with extensive high-quality 
documentation; even me -- a-non-musician -- may understand and master 
musical typography. Still `music' looks cute and compact for me, from 
the point of `little language' paradigm of the unix way and I am curious 
of its internals. Unfortunately, I see no sources anywhere.

--
Grisha