Re: [GLISS] basics

[Janek Warchoł]

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
<address@hidden> wrote:
> On 26/09/12 09:19, Janek Warchoł wrote:
>>
>> This is a good idea in itself, but i'm afraid we'll drown in the flood
>> of suggestions if we ask this question now.  Currently we want to
>> focus on syntax alone.
>
> I do understand that, it's just that I think that proposals for syntax
> changes make more sense when considered in the broader context of the
> notation you want to support.  I wasn't proposing asking it as a
> mailing-list question, more as a project that could probably be handled by
> relatively few people working from musical notation texts.

Ah, yes - we do need to make such analysis.

> I don't think that members of the
> Lilypond user list are necessarily representative of the range of engraving
> activity that Lilypond needs to support.  That's the other reason I
> suggested a systematic process of checking syntax/engraving support vs. a
> broad set of musical notation.

You have a point.
Hmm... i'm wondering whether there's any better way to do this than
walk through engraving books.

> there are also some surprisingly simple notations which show up here -- e.g.
> Ferneyhough frequently has hairpins which last until the end of the note and
> have a concluding dynamic value; that dynamic value falls at the end of the
> hairpin rather than the beginning of the subsequent note (if you get me).

oh yes, that's on my list of "difficult to express" things for more
than a year.
:)

cheers,
Janek