I both agree and disagree! My main objections are:
- I normally use a separate identifier for annotations like
tempo changes ("Andante", ...) that should only appear on the
top of the full score but in all the individual parts. Of course,
such a thing can also be done with \tag commands, but it will
will soon get very messy.- Another common thing to add in the separate parts that (often) don't appear in the full score is cue notes. Again, it seems to me that it just gets more messy to try to make a single definition of \score that can be reused both for the full score and the separate parts.
- I'm afraid a beginner (at least one who is not used to computer programming) will find the \tag related commands much more complicated than retyping a few lines for each part.
Of course, if you can make a neat example to prove me wrong, I would be happy to see it in the manual.
/Mats
Graham Percival wrote:
This isn't to demonstrate \tag. If I wanted to do that, I'd add it to the Notation
chapter. Example templates isn't the place to demonstrate such things.
No, the reason is that I have a pathological dislike of having anything in the individual instrument files that doesn't need to be there. Sure, I could do:
% Full score: << \new Staff { << \global \Violinone >> } \new Staff { << \global \Violintwo>> } \new Staff { << \global \Viola>> } \new Staff { << \global \Cello>> } >> % First violin part: \new Staff { << \global \Violinone >> }
But that's longer than % full score \new StaffGroup \keepWithTag #'score \music %first violin part \keepWithTag #'vn1 \music
Now, is there any reasonable advantage? I'm not certain if there are (although I don't think that having this example in the templates section hurts anybody).
I still like the idea, though. It provides a standard way of creating individual instrument files -- or combinations of instruments. Once you've created the main file ("piece.ly" in the template), you don't need to fool around with creating the infrastructure for each individual instrument. I still make mistakes when I'm doing the whole \score{ \new StaffGroup << \new Staff {} \newStaff {} >> } thing. It's easier for me to get that stuff done once.
Is it useful for LilyPond experts? No, probably not. But I imagine that quite a few non-experts could really appreciate creating input files this way.
- Graham
On 7-Jan-05, at 2:03 AM, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
Now I realize that you did this to get an example of how to use \tag. Still, the problem is that it doesn't really show any advantage (as far as I can see). Can't we find a better example where the command gives a clearer advantage?
/Mats
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
-- ============================================= Mats Bengtsson Signal Processing Signals, Sensors and Systems Royal Institute of Technology SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Sweden Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe =============================================
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
