[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Concepts that may be missing (or are at least hidden) in LilyPond
From: |
Carl Sorensen |
Subject: |
Re: Concepts that may be missing (or are at least hidden) in LilyPond |
Date: |
Mon, 27 Apr 2015 14:48:21 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.8.150116 |
On 4/27/15 6:37 AM, "Kieren MacMillan" <address@hidden>
wrote:
>Hi Urs,
>
>> I would strongly oppose to *replacing* the current approach with a
>>container based approach (I don't think you are even considering that, I
>>just want to make that clear).
>
>+1
Just to clarify my intent -- I'm not proposing *anything* about changing
LilyPond right now. I'm trying to find out what things may be missing from
LilyPond, so we can have a discussion about what to do about them.
For the record, I believe that LilyPond's music architecture is superior
to both MusicXML and MEI. I really think that the LilyPond music tree
(which results from parsing an input file), if all the contexts have been
explicitly defined, is the best logical representation of music that I
have seen.
And I agree with the thoughts expressed elsewhere that selecting and
deleting measures is an *editor* function, not a *lilypond* function.
Thanks,
Carl
Re: Concepts that may be missing (or are at least hidden) in LilyPond, David Nalesnik, 2015/04/27