| The math I mentioned is because I interpreted the bar number in:
a,4 ( a4 ) ( b4 ) d4 | % 6
as a help to locate the offending bar number…
David, sorry I offended you about work going on. I've got only one experience in open software contributions so far, which lead to a dead-end: these guys didn't even answer to my proposal...
I'll be glad to help on musicxml2ly, with guidance from Patrick or others as to how to proceed.
Jacques
On 09.04.2013, at 09:01, Urs Liska <address@hidden> wrote:
Am 09.04.2013 08:49, schrieb David Kastrup:
Jacques Menu <address@hidden> writes:
Hello folks,
I've been experimenting with Sibelius 7.1.3 as a front-end to Lily,
i.e. as a note input engine.
This lead me to fix some issues in musicxml2ly:
- the comment bar number at the end of regular lines is one
too much;
I don't see that. It is the number that would be printed above the bar.
- it's missing when a \ barNumberCheck is present;
Because then the bar number is given by the \barNumberCheck command.
- musicxml2ly crashes if there's no title specified in the XML
file.
That's certainly an error.
Which has been fixed on https://github.com/Philomelos/lilypond-musicxml2ly-dev
The first two points are important to me since they help locating the
guilty lines (it's cumbersome to have to do the math each time you
switch from an error message to the .ly file).
Math? You just look for the right bar number and then read on from
there.
Compare the 2.16.2 original with the modified version used on the
attached file:
< \clef "treble" \key c \major \numericTimeSignature\time 4/4
< \pageBreak a4 ( a4 ) ( b4 ) d4 | % 2
< \key c \major a4 ( a4 ) ( b4 ) d4 | % 3
< a4 ( a4 ) ( b4 ) d4 | % 4
< g1 | % 5
< a,4 ( a4 ) ( b4 ) d4 | % 6
< g1 \break | % 7
< a,4 ( a4 ) ( b4 ) d4 | % 8
< g1 | % 9
< a,4 ( a4 ) ( b4 ) d4 | \barNumberCheck #10
< g1 | % 11
< a,4 ( a4 ) ( b4 ) d4 | % 12
Looks consistent to me.
a,4 ( a4 ) ( b4 ) d4 | % 9
g1 | \barNumberCheck #11 % 10
wouldn't it be better to write
g1 | % 10
\barNumberCheck #11
in such cases?
Urs
a,4 ( a4 ) ( b4 ) d4 | % 11
Not exactly an improvement here, is it?
I could spend time on the TODOs mentioned in the code, hence my
question: is there work going on on musicxml2ly, and if so, can I
contribute to it?
Wouldn't it be even more important to contribute to it if there was _no_
work going on on musicxml2ly?
Currently there is not much happening with it.
Wrong. I spent quite a considerable amount of time tracking down and analyzing bugs that lead to compilation failures. These bugs have a high priority. There are a lot more issues of the type "ugly". Apart from this there are still many white gaps in musicxml2ly. But we only have limited time to fix all of these problems...
The Philomelos guys have
their own fork of it, but so far not much has been reintegrated into
LilyPond IIRC.
We have fixed quite a few issues but there is still a lot to do. Help would be very much appreciated! I can offer to help with the reintegration of the code and to share our findings / bug reports.
hth
patrick
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
--
Jacques Menu Ch. de la Pierre 121023 Crissier
|