Am 08.10.2012 11:56, schrieb Marc Hohl:
Am 24.09.2012 01:29, schrieb Urs Liska:
Hi LilyPond coders,
I'm quite happy to tell you that I just finished a new version of my
'lilyglyphs' package. This is not a release, but just a progress from
a 0.0.1 version to a 0.0.2, so don't expect anything polished here.
For those who missed the first announcement a few weeks ago:
lilyglyphs is a (Xe-) LaTeX package aiming at providing LilyPond's
notational elements as commands for use in continuous text in LaTeX
documents.
Hello Urs,
thanks for sharing this! In some of my future projects the lilyglyphs
package will be quite handy,
but I have not tested it yet, just looked at the code.
Well, as far as it's developed it works quite well ...
...
b)
The next issue to tackle is to create symbols (or Grobs) that aren't
glyphs but have to be created using glyphs and drawing commands. I
did the first test using the tikz/pgf package, but can see very well
that it isn't a trivial task. The most obvious issue is to make the
resulting graphics scalable without breaking. But on the long run it
may be equally important to make this system modular. I don't want to
create every new symbol from scratch, but want to be able to reuse
elements.
Hmm, I can't really help you with this, but if you want to create
complex symbols, wouldn't it make sense
to do this in lilypond directly similarly to the way it is done in
lilypond-book, and import the graphics in
LaTeX?
I thought about this too, but I'm not sure if it really is the way to go.
The great advantages would be:
* it is probably quite straightforward to start with and implement it
* the result would exactly look like LilyPond output (which might in
the end be the killer argument)
OTOH there are two issues I don't like about it:
* We'd have to provide lots of graphics files together with the package.
* I would prefer having the control over the creation of the items on
the LaTeX level.
What I like about the glyphs already available is that the end user
can easily enhance the library, combine elements and write new commands.
With complex symbols I would also love to have possibilities like
\lilyNote{notehead=noteheads.s1,flag=flag.u6} or
\lilyBeamedNotes{beams=3,angle=15}
so one could expand the library within LaTeX.
And one could make changes to symbols that are applied by a simple
recompile.
But OTOH again, this would mean that for any 'new' symbol we'd have
to design a completely new drawing command, which might be quite
complex.
Maybe it's a solution to go the way of included graphics files, but find
a standardized way how to create these files (LilyPond templates,
instructions, standardized sizes, scripts ...) so it's easy to add new
items and also accessible to end users.
BTW: Does anybody know if I can scale graphics files automatically
according to the font size of the text?
Best
Urs
Regards,
Marc
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
