Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version)

[Urs Liska]

Hi all,

thanks to the feedback on this list I reviewed the interface to my \annotate function and think it has become quite elegant now.
Please have a look at the attached file and at the updated description on https://github.com/openlilylib/lilypond-doc/wiki/Documenting-musical-content
I'm interested in any caveats, enhancement suggestions, and/or further use cases.

This is only the starting point for a potentially interesting project, so anybody who's interested joining and helping me is highly welcome.

Urs

Am 06.06.2013 12:09, schrieb Urs Liska:

Hi,

I want to develop a 'lilypond-doc' package that can be used to
a) document the API of a project or a library and
b) document the musical content of lilypond scores.

You can see an overview of its goals on https://github.com/openlilylib/lilypond-doc/wiki

I urgently need at least the function signature of the core function of b) in order to be able to use it in an existing score, even when I haven't implemented the functionality yet.

As I think this can become a valuable extension and I'd like to see it in LilyPond proper one day I'd like to discuss it on this list before actually starting to work.

On https://github.com/openlilylib/lilypond-doc/wiki/Documenting-musical-content you'll find a quite detailed description what I think the function should look like, attached you'll find an example file showing how I'd use it in a score.

I'm interested in
- general thoughts on the signature design (as I still lack experience with Scheme functions)
- more or different use cases, especially if they'd suggest changes in the signature design

Best
Urs

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

annotate.ily
Description: Text document