future featurs etc.

[David Bobroff]

>While this was slightly tedious to repair it was a couple
>> of orders of magnitude better than keying in the entire file by hand.
>
>Really?  I guess it depends on how long the file is, but I'd prefer to
>enter everything by hand.  If nothing else, it helps you to practice
>your Lilypond and typing skills!  :)

Well, in this case it was a few Gabrieli pieces.  I've got the scores/parts
but storing them in some sort of digital data format allows me to transpose
them for different instrument groups.  All I had to do was add block rests
and tweak things a bit.  Seeing what etf2ly did with the data was very
instructive, though.  As for LilyPond typing skills; I can type well
enough, it's a matter of working on my skills at organizing my input files.
 Extra typing practice isn't going to improve that for me.

>> Question: Are there plans for more complete conversion of ETF files in
>> the near future (by version 2.0 for example)?
>
>I really can't speak for the non-doc devel stuff -- in fact, I can't even
>really speak about the doc devel stuff -- but I doubt it.  I expect that
>Lilypond devel people would rather spend effort towards supporting musicxml
>and other Free music score formats.

But it could serve as a lure to Finale users.  Other GNU programs which go
after the "Office" crowd support *.doc and *.xml, for example.

>If you just want a few coloured items, you could always just load the
>postscript output into a graphics program and colour them manually.  :)

That wouldn't be practical for things like red staff lines.

>Again, I don't think that this is/will be a priority.

Fair enough, but if it doesn't happen because nobody asked for it then it's
my fault.

>> With the advances being made on the neumes in LilyPond it may be that it
>> will be ready for "prime time" in the near future.  With the addition of
>
>I think that Lilypond is already ready for "prime time" -- I've used it
>for two years in a university music composition course, thereby saving
>me $300 (or whatever the "cheap" student version of Finale or Sibelius
>costs).  And some people have exclaimed "wow!  How did you get Finale to
>make music that looks so good?"
>

Yes, but I was referring to the neume notation.  Quoting from the manual:

Gregorian square neumes notation (following the style of the Editio
Vaticana) is under heavy development, but not yet really usable for
production purposes. Core ligatures can already be typeset, but essential
issues for serious typesetting are still under development, [...]this
section gives a sneak preview of what Gregorian chant may look like once it
will work.

>> color capabilities (for staff lines, early flat and natural signs,
>> lyrics, etc.) it would be a boon to those working on such a project.
>
>Most (as in "way over 99%") music is printed as black-and-white.

True, Nearly All music is printed in black and white.  

>Why do you want colour so much?

Well, I didn't say *I* wanted it so much, or even at all.  As I said, a
friend is working on an old manuscript.  In many old MSS the notation is
colorful.  Staff lines are sometimes red, or the proto-flat is red, plus
there is the occasional colored text.  LilyPond's raison d'etre is to make
beautiful sheet music.  These old MSS look beautiful in part due to the
color.  LilyPond uses the TeX --> PS --> PDF gadgets and via such wizardry
color can be had.  Whether it can be had within LilyPond is a rather
different issue.  If the developers (Jan and Han-Wen) decide it is worth
the effort (cost/benefit analysis) and can be done, then it can happen.
Again, if this doesn't happen because nobody asked about it --- it's my fault.

Cheers,

David