[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: why you don't contribute to Mutopia
From: |
Richard Shann |
Subject: |
Re: why you don't contribute to Mutopia |
Date: |
Wed, 01 Jan 2014 18:34:33 +0000 |
On Wed, 2014-01-01 at 19:01 +0100, Federico Bruni wrote:
> For example, they may create the score with Denemo and then export the
> lilypond file, but they cannot check the quality of the file. I'd
> suggest them to try to submit their file to the mutopia-discuss list
> and see if someone can clean the input. Personally, I'd be glad to
> contribute this way.
Better would be to write a command for Denemo that adds the
mutopia-required headers. A more serious problem would be Denemo users
who have no understanding of the LilyPond output, they will not be using
the \repeat { ..... } format as it requires placing the first part of
the construct at a place where nothing may appear in the typeset file
(e.g. at the beginning).
So they will generate LilyPond files with
\set Score.repeatCommands = #'((volta "1"))
and such like, which make reading the LilyPond output harder. I don't
think there would be a practical way round that.
Richard
- why you don't contribute to Mutopia, Federico Bruni, 2014/01/01
- Re: why you don't contribute to Mutopia,
Richard Shann <=
- Re: why you don't contribute to Mutopia, David Kastrup, 2014/01/01
- Re: why you don't contribute to Mutopia, Richard Shann, 2014/01/01
- Re: why you don't contribute to Mutopia, David Kastrup, 2014/01/01
- Re: why you don't contribute to Mutopia, Keith OHara, 2014/01/01
- Re: why you don't contribute to Mutopia, Noeck, 2014/01/01