On 14.02.2016 19:46, Simon Albrecht wrote:
On 14.02.2016 16:42, dl.mcnam...@comcast.net wrote:
I'm not sure how your suggestion would mesh with the piece's overall
structure;
Here's a more complete take:
http://lilybin.com/l8kuff/2
There’s nothing in that link – could you try again?
(I tried to trim extra stuff for a minimal example).
A complete version is here
http://imslp.nl/imglnks/usimg/d/db/IMSLP04156-Bach_-_BGA_439-518.pdf
it's number 16 (page 8).
The A section is repeated with different lyrics, this is followed by
a few more, non-repeated, phrases.
It’s a known problem that we don’t have a satisfactory interface for
that kind of structure in lyrics. Ideally there would be some sensible
input method, automatically arranging the lyrics so the alternatives
for the repeat are correctly arranged, with braces, and the following
piece centered. But this is no more than a wish.
Given the current set of tools, I’d suggest to continue
Sorry, here I sent prematurely. The easiest way is to just write the
lyrics for the ‘Abgesang’ (the part after the repeat) in the lower of
the lyrics contexts. Maybe I’ll come back with a refined solution.
I thought that it would be sensible and useful to have separate
variables for the full melody, the full lyrics, bass, and figures.
I like this because it keeps the commands within the score block
relatively simple, and thus allows me to easily turn off the lyrics
(for example)
by just commenting out a single line.
Of course; I don’t (yet) do it the same way myself, but I understand
the intent. But I hope you’re getting my point: if I have to skim
through 100 lines of code first and understand which variable points
where, that keeps me from getting at the actual problem.
This gets to something that is not (to my knowledge) well documented:
what
is a good way of organizing and structuring the lilypond content?
Well, there are some hints in the manuals, but basically there is a
lot of liberty in this respect. Everything is possible, from the most
simple structure without using variables (though that’s almost never
sensible) to very advanced Scheme framework like GridLY or other
solutions.
It would be desirable to have more generally accepted standards here,
for multiple reasons, but on the other hand it would really take away
flexibility. I think that in this field LilyPond is just a very
‘young’ project and we’ll have to go a long way still.
Best, Simon
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
