Re: Issue 3720: Built-in templates for SATB vocal scores (issue 41990043)

[Janek Warchoł]

Got a free moment..

2013/12/15 Carl Peterson <address@hidden>:
> I think I share in what I get to be the general sense of many of the
> comments that have been made thus far. There is a tradeoff between
> ease of default use and the customizability. To use a bad and probably
> over-generalized analogy, we're going from Linux (where you pretty
> much have to do it yourself, but you can make it do pretty much
> anything you want) to Mac (where everything is easy IF you are willing
> to work within the predefined templates, and anything else is almost
> impossible). We need something in between.
>
> I don't know that this is the route to go. If our goal is to get
> people using LP, I don't think that what we need is a function that
> hides basic structures from the users, where if they want to go beyond
> this, they have to move from two include commands to a whole new
> structure. I think what we need is a stripped-down choral/SATB layout
> that uses minimal overrides and extra code so that new users can
> copy-and-paste and start experimenting with.

I believe we need to add an abstraction layer that would make it
conceptually simpler to write \score blocks.

Please take a look at
https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets/tree/master/templates/predefined-instruments

I believe that this is exactly what LilyPond needs to allow beginner
users easily create score structures.  Notice how much it shortens the
\score definition.  I don't quite understand why nobody seems
interested in this...

Janek

PS this is not to say that i don't like Trevor's templates! I believe
they are a useful addition.