Re: Remaining lsr-snippets to approve - feed-back needed

[Thomas Morley]

2016-04-03 10:51 GMT+02:00 Pierre Perol-Schneider
<address@hidden>:
> Hi Harm, Hi All,
>
> (1) Ok, for deleting.

Deleted.

> (2) Those were drafts, even without description. I forgot to work on them.

Should I keep them for further work?

> (3) I don't know. In France there is some rights for copying few measures in
> an article if sources is clearly stated (which I did)

I vaguely recall Germany has something akin. We need to be sure
world-wide, though.
So undecided for now.

> (4) same as (2) Please delete, too complicate.

Deleted.

> (5) Did you notice I've changed the design ?

Yep, though you still need to set with-dimensions and the advantage
compared with the built-in markup-command still escapes me.


Cheers,
  Harm


>
> Thank you Harm,
> Cheers to All,
>
> Pierre
>
> 2016-04-02 14:53 GMT+02:00 Thomas Morley <address@hidden>:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> after far to long laziness in approving lsr-snippets, I used
>> spring-break to go through them. Most are approved now, sometimes with
>> more or less heavy editing.
>> Though, there are few left, where I'm not sure how to deal with.
>> All by Pierre, thus cc-ing him.
>>
>> (1)
>> "StaffGroup bracket with a variable length (path)"
>> http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?u=1&id=989
>>
>> This one is obviously a construction helper and the method is used in
>> "Repeat-bar-lines with angle-wings for whole StaffGroup (manually)"
>> http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?u=1&id=991
>>
>> Though, why doing all from scratch and not using brackettips.up/down from
>> feta?
>> I see no point in keeping "StaffGroup bracket with a variable length
>> (path)" and vote for deleting it.
>>
>> Side-notes:
>> a)
>> We have
>> "Curly bracket with variable length (path)"
>> http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=988
>> which indeed prints brackets different from feta, so I have no problem
>> with it.
>> This method is used in
>> "Orchestral grouping with a custom brace"
>> http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=986
>> b)
>> Additionally I've uploaded
>> "Repeat-bar-lines with angle-wings for whole StaffGroup (automatic and
>> semi-automatic)"
>> http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?u=1&id=1032
>>
>>
>> (2)
>> There are these two snippets:
>>
>> Instrument name as staff lines
>> http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?u=1&id=981
>>
>> Instrument name as staff lines (alternative)
>> http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?u=1&id=983
>>
>> Both lack of description.
>> Which one should I approve? Or even both?
>>
>>
>> (3)
>> "Squeeze and split staff"
>> http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?u=1&id=1005
>>
>> It really demonstrates the full power of the path-command.
>> Though, it recodes an existing image.
>>
>> The original-pdf can be downloaded at
>> http://www.graphire.com/Pages/Framesets/framesmp.htm
>> click "Sample Output" -> "Fuqua"-example
>>
>> Is there a copyright-issue?
>>
>>
>> (4)
>> "Worksheet"
>> http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?u=1&id=922
>> It demonstrates the use of markup-commands and fullfills the
>> snippet-description, nothing more.
>> Worth keeping/approving it?
>>
>> (5)
>> "Eyeglasses as markup (path)"
>> http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?u=1&id=982
>>
>> It was already discussed at:
>> http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/LSR-eyeglasses-snippet-td179471.html
>> Though again, any point in keeping it?
>> I'd vote for deleting it.
>>
>>
>> I'd love to have some feedback how to proceed with the above mentioned
>> snippets.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>   Harm
>
>