[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version)
From: |
Urs Liska |
Subject: |
Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version) |
Date: |
Tue, 11 Jun 2013 10:38:02 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130510 Thunderbird/17.0.6 |
Am 10.06.2013 18:52, schrieb David Kastrup:
Richard Shann <address@hidden> writes:
This looks great Urs. I wrote a CriticalComment command for Denemo
that allows you to attach comments to notes in a score. These comments
can include \score {} blocks so that the music being commented on can
be engraved within the sentence.
Sounds like issue 3187
<URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3187> committed
to version 2.17.14 would have a very relevant impact on that feature.
I'm interested in your opinion on that.
I think we should clarify if we are talking about the same thing.
If we're not (which I assume) we should
a) try to convince each other that our own approach is better,
b) try to find a way to harmonize and complement the approaches or
c) accept that we have different things at hand.
Definitely my favourite is b) of course.
_My_ idea is/was to have a function \annotate that lets you enter
annotations.
These should go
a) to the console output so anybody compiling the file can see the
annotations
b) to an intermediate file to be used later
- as an overview (with backlinking to the source code)
- in separate (text) documents
c) (optionally) color the items in the score and (maybe) enter things
like balloon tips in the score
I did _not_ think of entering the annotations as markup anywhere in the
score.
Of course all this is heavily based on my own interests and working styles.
For example I wouldn't usually typeset a critical report within the
LilyPond score, just because they usually are too voluminous.
Programs like Denemo, laborejo or Frescobaldi can make use of such a
function by providing tools to insert and edit entries. So of course it
would be good to design a function in a way that it is useful for these
programs.
That said:
Having a feature to enter a list of annotations at any point in the
score would be a good thing to have.
I identified your CriticalComment... commands in the manual.
But from looking at the source tree I can't tell anything. Would be too
complicated for now to start trying to understand that. So please allow
me the question:
How do your critical comments work? Do they write something down that
CriticalCommentary reads in or do you just fill some variables array
that CriticalCommentary uses?
If I see the situation correctly the best way to integrate would be:
- having the \annotate function like I sketched it, and modify it so it
can handle the information you give to critical comments
- have a function \annotations that can be entered as a top-level
command that will be turned into a \markup.
This function should have an argument that filters the list by its type
(e.g. only "critical-remarks") and also takes the Intro as an argument.
Where do you define CriticalCommentary in your source code? I'd like to
have a look at it.
Maybe it would make sense to move these functions to an external library
(i.e. my lilypond-doc) so Denemo and any other tools can just _use_ it...
Best
Urs
- Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), (continued)
- Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), Richard Shann, 2013/06/10
- Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), David Kastrup, 2013/06/10
- Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), Richard Shann, 2013/06/10
- Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), David Kastrup, 2013/06/10
- Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), Richard Shann, 2013/06/10
- Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), Richard Shann, 2013/06/11
- Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version),
Urs Liska <=
- Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), Richard Shann, 2013/06/11
- Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), Janek Warchoł, 2013/06/11
Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), Janek Warchoł, 2013/06/11
- Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), Urs Liska, 2013/06/11
- Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), Janek Warchoł, 2013/06/11
- Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), Urs Liska, 2013/06/11
- Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), David Kastrup, 2013/06/11
- Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), Urs Liska, 2013/06/11
- Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), PMA, 2013/06/11
Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version), Tim Slattery, 2013/06/11