Am 7. Februar 2015 04:47:11 MEZ, schrieb Craig Dabelstein <address@hidden>:
>Dear Urs,
>
>All good.
>
>I've followed all your instructions -- no problem.
>
>However, perhaps I'm putting \setOption
>scholarly.annotate.export-targets
>#'("latex" "plaintext") in the wrong place. I put this in the
>"main-init.ily" file, yes?
>
>When I try to engrave the score I get this error:
>
>Parsing...
>
>
>openLilyLib: library infrastructure successfully loaded.
>
>
>Interpreting music...[8][16][24]
>/Users/craigdabelstein/Dropbox/Lilypond/openlilylib/ly/scholarly/annotate/__main__.ily:150:34
><0>: In procedure string->symbol in _expression_ (string->symbol ctx-id):
>
>/Users/craigdabelstein/Dropbox/Lilypond/openlilylib/ly/scholarly/annotate/__main__.ily:150:34
><1>: Wrong type argument in position 1 (expecting string): #t
>
>Exited with return code 1.
This looks like a bug to me. It seems you managed to use a constellation I failed to check. This is in the code where the name of the context is determined.
Please try with a simple example file to check whether you can get it to compile at all.
Unfortunately I don't think I'll be able to work on this today at all.
Best
Urs
.
>
>Craig
>
>
>
>On Sat Feb 07 2015 at 11:23:04 AM Urs Liska <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>>
>> Am 07.02.2015 um 00:40 schrieb Urs Liska:
>>
>>
>> Am 07.02.2015 um 00:39 schrieb Craig Dabelstein:
>>
>> Hi List,
>>
>> Sorry for the frustrating question, but how do I combine Samuel's
>code -- @address@hidden@
>> -- with an annotate message such as -- "Should the @\textit{cresc.}
>begin
>> here or immediately after the preceeding address@hidden"
>>
>>
>> You don't do that at all. You simply wait until I have managed to
>update
>> everything and upload it ;-)
>>
>>
>> Sorry, didn't intend to sound harsh ...
>>
>> Now I've fixed a few more things and uploaded it to Github - but you
>have
>> to make significant changes to get anything new, because I've moved
>the
>> whole thing into a new structure within openLilyLib.
>> Sorry to let you switch just after having started, but it's better to
>do
>> The Right Thing now.
>>
>> I will soon write a new post about all this (which I'm extremely
>excited
>> about), but for now just the instructions for using ScholarLY:
>>
>>
>> - Discard the ScholarLY repository
>> (if you'd do git pull you'd probably be surprised to be left with
>only
>> one README file ;-) )
>> - Remove the path to ScholarLY from LilyPond's include path
>> - Download, clone or update openLilyLib (from
>> https://github.com/openlilylib/openlilylib)
>> - Add the /ly directory within that repository to LilyPond's
>include
>> path
>> (If you already use openLilyLib you will have its root directory
>in
>> the include path, and you should keep that for now. Once the
>reorganization
>> is finished this can be removed - but that will take a
>considerable amount
>> of time I
>>
>> Once that is in place you have to modify your documents like this:
>>
>> - remove the \include "scholarly/annotate.ily"
>> - add
>> \include "openlilylib"
>> - add
>> \loadModule "scholarly"
>>
>> Now you can use the annotation commands as before.
>> What is significantly different is the common configuration
>> infrastructure. This is not documented for ScholarLY yet (as said
>I'll make
>> a proper announcement later when it's ready). Basically you can
>configure
>> ScholarLY (or any other to-be-added openLilyLib library) with the new
>> \setOption
>> command that is part of the new openLilyLib infrastructure.
>>
>> As said the options are not documented yet, but you can have a look
>at
>> config.ily in the annotate folder.
>> What you'll need is probably
>>
>> \setOption scholarly.annotate.export-targets #'("latex" "plaintext")
>>
>> You can also experiment with
>>
>> \setOption scholarly.annotate.print ##f
>> \setOption scholarly.annotate.sort-criteria #'("type")
>> \setOption scholarly.colorize ##f
>>
>> Good luck
>>
>>
>> Urs
>>
>>
>>
>> Craig
>>
>>
>> On Sat Feb 07 2015 at 7:49:15 AM Urs Liska <address@hidden>
>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Am 06.02.2015 um 22:46 schrieb Br. Samuel Springuel:
>>> > On 2015-02-06 4:18 PM, Noeck wrote:
>>> >> You could also enforce this by now allowing all characters
>between
>>> >> the @:
>>> >> e.g. @[-a-zA-Z\\_]*@
>>> >
>>> > Rather than include all characters not "@" it would be better to
>>> > simply exclude "@". I.e.:
>>> >
>>> > @address@hidden@
>>> >
>>> > The "^", when it is the first character inside a brace changes the
>>> > brace from meaning "anything in this group" to meaning "anything
>not
>>> > in this group". As a result this _expression_ will match an string
>>> > contained between to "@" characters which does not itself contain
>an @
>>> > character.
>>> >
>>> > I'm fairly certain this is standard for regular expressions.
>>>
>>> Maybe. In any case it seems to work for the problem at hand, while
>>> "@.*?@" did not work.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Urs
>>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝
>>> > Br. Samuel, OSB
>>> > (R. Padraic Springuel)
>>> >
>>> > PAX ☧ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > lilypond-user mailing list
>>> > address@hidden
>>> > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> lilypond-user mailing list
>>> address@hidden
>>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> lilypond-user mailing
>address@hiddenhttps://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> lilypond-user mailing list
>> address@hidden
>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>>