[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Issue 37 - new work
From: |
address@hidden |
Subject: |
Re: Issue 37 - new work |
Date: |
Sat, 29 Jan 2011 11:20:55 -0500 |
On Jan 29, 2011, at 10:50 AM, Marc Hohl wrote:
> Am 29.01.2011 09:50, schrieb David Kastrup:
>> Marc Hohl<address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> If this is done similar to LaTeX packages where you can enable the
>>> option "draft"
>>> to speed up compiling, and if everything looks ok, you remove the draft and
>>> that's it, then this would be not too confusing for users.
>> draft Mode in LaTeX omits details but does not change the layout or
>> pagebreaking.
>>
> The comparison between LaTeX and LilyPond was not meant to be 1:1, of course.
> The point here was that IMHO most LaTeX users understand what "draft" means,
> so it would not be too confusing to add certain levels of processing stages.
>
> On the other hand, I agree with you that LilyPond should simply do the best
> job without the need to fuzz around with optimization stages and whatnot.
> Human engravers didn't have a "draft" mode either ;-)
>
True, but human engravers did not have the benefit of sending composers drafts
every time a measure was updated.
I think that for programs like SCORE, the logic of "best job" makes perfect
sense because it is best used for typesetting finished works.
But, given that many people make drafts in Lilypond, I think that a draft mode
would save a lot of time in the early stages of creating a work.
However, I think that lilypond's default quality should be the highest
possible, with people opting out of this quality for faster calculated and thus
iffy-er looking scores.
On this note, I think that PaperColumn #'keep-inside-line = ##t and
NonMusicalPaperColumn #'keep-inside-line = ##t should be the default options in
Lilypond, as I cannot imagine anyone wanting markups to spill outside of the
line width. In a way, setting these as ##f in scm/define-grobs.scm is a form
of "normal" optimization that leads to sub-par results.
Cheers,
MS
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, (continued)
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, address@hidden, 2011/01/29
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2011/01/28
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, Graham Percival, 2011/01/28
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2011/01/28
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, Graham Percival, 2011/01/28
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2011/01/28
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, Graham Percival, 2011/01/28
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, Marc Hohl, 2011/01/29
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, David Kastrup, 2011/01/29
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, Marc Hohl, 2011/01/29
- Re: Issue 37 - new work,
address@hidden <=
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, Bernard Hurley, 2011/01/29
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, David Kastrup, 2011/01/29
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2011/01/28
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2011/01/28
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, Mike Solomon, 2011/01/28
- Re: Issue 37 - new work, Mike Solomon, 2011/01/28