Re: Discussion: automatic engraving and single-source publishing

[Janek Warchoł]

2013/11/26 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
> Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> 2013/11/26 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
>
>>> But if we are talking about a hundred tweaks per page, it is
>>> extremely unlikely that those tweaks are _not_ dealing with
>>> systematic problems, and dealing with systematic problems is
>>> something that the computer does with a lot less effort and boredom
>>> and tie-in than a human in the long run.
>>
>> Yes, i definitely agree!  But i also agree with Joe wheh he says:
>>
>> 2013/11/26 Joseph Rushton Wakeling <address@hidden>:
>>> A growing user base corresponds to a much broader range of engraving
>>> scenarios and hence feedback that helps drive automation.
>>
>> Case in point: exactly _because_ i had used \shape to tweak over a
>> 1000 slurs, i was able to see how to best improve it, and now we'll
>> have the ability to use polar coordinates in \shape.
>> Which is a step towards robustness and automation (for example, one
>> \shape with polar coordinates can often fix multiple slurs).
>
> Aren't you confusing "automation" with "more comfortable manual tools"
> here?

Not quite.  Yes, as of now i've mostly worked on making tweaking more
comfortable, but i gained insight that will be helpful when improving
automation.

>> Bottom line: after \shaping 1000 slurs, i got really bored and
>> improved \shape.  After using it for the next 500 slurs, i expect to
>> get really bored again and fix some issues in slur formatting that
>> will bother me the most - because i'll be _personally motivated_ to do
>> so.  Repeat ad infinitum :-)
>
> I haven't been doing any actual typesetting for years, so that approach
> does not work all that much for me.
>
> My usual creative process involves explaining to people how to do
> something with LilyPond and becoming so grossly embarrassed that
> I change LilyPond rather than having to repeat that explanation.

:-)