Francisco Vila wrote > 2012/11/17 Stretto < > uiy12345@
> >: >> Basically exactly what I said... I never said tikz couldn't use absolute >> coordinates but it would not be fun to try and use to overlay graphics on >> a >> lilypond score. There would be a lot of trial and error, and given the >> compilations times are not instant this would take quite a long time to >> get >> right... and then any change to the score would generally void the >> results >> and require starting over. > > Respectfully: it seems you didn't read my email. I tried to explain > that lilypond could export the coordinates to feed tikz with them. So, > no trial+error. > > Anyway, it's only an idea on how it possibly could be done. > -- > Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) > www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@ > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Respectfully, you don't seem to be reading my posts. I said lilypond could export the coordinates in my 2nd post, the one you responded to. What you fail to realize is that the whole point is for lilypond to be the one to deal with the coordinates. Regardless of how you want to have this done, it is pointless for the user to have to use absolute coordinates in his tikz code because of the reasons I previously gave. So, if you want lilypond to export a coordinate list(hopefully more than just a list of numbers, as that will be damn near useless) or to use some markup language build in to lilypond, it must be done by lilypond because lilypond is the only one that knows the actual coordinates. I proposed that lilypond handle it inside ly code because it can remove several extra steps such as automatically adding the overlay and allowing for inline markup code. One could allow for a second tikz code section which works on "marked" elements. If I have to use `\draw (3.2, 5.8) -- (1.8, 4.5);` to draw a line between two elements in a lilypond score then I am using absolute coordinates and it is the worse way to do it. There is no other way to do this AFAIK. BUT if I can do `\draw (note1) -- (note2);` then I'm using nodes and it is the preferred way. This is using aliases for the coordinates, in which case, lilypond can take care of the mapping for us. If the actual coordinates change then it won't affect our code as much. The thing about using tikz markup inside lilypond is it also takes away the issue of having to figure out how to name objects. If the notes are exported as note1,.....,note1934 then `\draw (note45) --(note47);` is no better than using absolute coordinates. Any change in the score(adding a note) would affect the tikz code just as it would affect absolute coordinates. So your naming has to be design to be relatively coordinate free(such as ScoreA.StaffA.Bar34.Beat2.Note2) which would, generally, only require changing the Bar number for major inserts(still not the best way). Using inline markup fixes that problem completely(but, then, of course, clutters up the ly code with tikz markup). -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Tikz-or-any-integration-or-drawing-curved-arrows-tp136419p136580.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
