Re: Usability Question

[Jonathan Henkelman]

Upro <jelden <at> gmail.com> writes:

> I admit that not finding the function for a simple line brake was not very
> smart of me. I have studied the online-manual thouroughly, but it's not easy
> to find solutions there, and I haven't found them for the descripbed
> problems.

Try the PDF version as it is really easy to search.  Also you can search 
within sites with google (haven't tried this, but imagine it works)

> Suggestions like condensing a four voiced, polyphonic piece by Bach for an
> Urtext edition for one of the major publishers seems to me a strange
> reaction to my query.
> 
> Also, fake a solution with invisibile notes is not a solution you would like
> to use in an edition of a 65-page manuscript.

I think this comes to a rather important issue.  Lilypond has not been what I 
had expected (read: ideally hoped!) when I first came across it.  The reality 
never is as simple we would like it to be, because the reality has to deal 
with all the contingencies adressed in this archive.  BUT, the question is, is 
there something better out there? Are you willing to PAY for it?  If not, then 
how can one (you) be part of the solution - i.e. making LP better, easier, 
clearer, more concise etc. even if that only means generating positive 
constructive criticism.  I agree it isn't perfect, it's a work in progress. 
Remember LP is made up of volunteers, and is not a money making software 
venture.  I find it grates a bit to start a question by saying the software is 
deficient because ~ I don't have the time (read: am not willing) to learn how 
to use it.

I am also sure that "professional" editors etc. are forced to work around 
their software to get it to do what they want.  I have never used a piece of 
saftware that didn't require this.  I don't see anything "un-professional" 
about invisible notes, constructing chord in polyphony.  Do what it takes - 
that's what the pro's do.  If it isn't good enough for you, try something else.

> I'm trying to use lilypond for an important publication, so I'd be glad to
> get some real help here!

I'll stand behind Graham.  The implication here is that his help is not real.  
Read above comments on volunteers.  The folks writing in are human and benefit 
from a positive like the rest of us.

Jonathan