Hi Shevek, > I don't mind having to insert the occasional layout-related command — > I actually prefer the ability to switch between clearly defined behaviors, > rather than have Lilypond try to guess which to use.
I like having both options. =) > The biggest problem caused by inserting commands mid-music is > that it breaks up multi-measure rests for the parts That's definitely a problem. I also just prefer separating presentation from content as much as possible — putting (e.g.) \partcombineChords right in fluteII is great when I'm combining fluteI & fluteII, but maybe doesn't make sense if I'm combining fluteII & fluteIV in some other edition/score, etc. > Correct me if I'm misunderstanding, but it sounds like you're using the > edition engraver to do various score layouts, but in each version the staff > distribution will stay the same throughout the piece. No — the staff distribution changes. > My use case is a bit different, as within the course of a piece > I need to be able to condense orchestral winds into shared staves > and split them up again, depending on the musical context. Yes, I do that. > I don't see how it would be possible to do that without > inserting layout commands into the music code. The edition-engraver can "inject" the layout commands into the score at the correct moment. For example, I use the e-e to put a \showMMRs command into a frenched score where I want to force an empty staff to appear (where it otherwise wouldn't). > 1) Which parts are on which staff when, and whether they are unison, chords, > or voices? In particular, when switching from unison or chords to separate > staves, if the same-staff passage continues over a system break it should > automatically split into separate staves wherever the break happens to > occur. The command to go to separate staves should appear just before the > passage to which it applies. > > 2) The staff naming depends on the status of the divisi and the system > breaking, as we alluded to earlier. > > 3) Some text markups change depending on whether staves are combined. For > instance, it should read "solo" or "1. solo" depending on whether the player > needs to be specified. Also, "a2" should automatically be reprinted after > measures of rest. > > The most critical thing for me is being able to do score and parts from the > same music, so that I can revise and compose cleanly. I agree with all of this. Being able to do score and parts from the same music is yet another reason I always want to keep the music code clear of any presentation-layer commands. I'll put together a small example of how I use the edition-engraver to inject presentation commands into a score. Until you see it in action, I imagine it would be hard to understand what I'm talking about (and the power of that ability). Cheers, Kieren. ________________________________ Kieren MacMillan, composer ‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info ‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
