Gerard McConnell <gerine...@gmail.com> writes: > I often see topics introduced here in which solutions are sought for > font-related or position-related problems. Almost all of these > problems are easily solved by creating an SVG file with Lilypond and > then editing that file with Inkscape. What is the downside of > working this way?
Lilypond is a batch system making a lot of automatic typesetting decisions. One of its strong points is that it is very friendly for doing revisions and arriving at output that it is as good as if the revision would have been part of the original score to start with. You can also reproduce the score at various stages with various variants of Lilypond, if you checked the score into a version control system. Every version is completely reproducible and all its input is there. If you post-edit the output manually, the straight connection between input and output is gone. This loss of transparency and determinism is bad for a lot of workflows. Basically, this situation is not all that different to the respective advantages of the workflows of typical LaTeX documents as compared to common WYSIWYG word processors. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
