Hi,
After last week discussions on what is / missing of / wrong in / not
pretty with / wished for / the woodwind stencils, I've made a list off
all things concerning the (bass-)clarinet stencils (about 20 smaller
and bigger items) and I dived into the code.
I've already changed some things manually in my local copy to check my
approach and knowledge and I think I can arrive at a version answering
most of these. In fact I've already tested and done some smaller
things. I'm aiming at arriving at a situation in which one diagram
covers the Selmer and Buffet Crampon top-models so covering most of
the users. To be honest and have the credits right: Mike's code does
(and still will do) 99.9% of things, what I will do is just "dressing
up".
However I think I arrived at a "crossroad" into multiple possibilities:
1. Either I keep everything intact so new things will only show up in
the result with the current key-name addressing kept intact. This
limits me in repairing some things.
-- OR --
2. I throw over some of the code, clean up, do some renaming of keys
wanted, but with the danger of upsetting people who are already using
the current diagrams. For example: I want to rename the right-hand key
labeled "four" to "side-ees" to make to naming more consistent and
change the label accordingly. But this also has effect on the basic
clarinet stencil. If someone then uses a diagram specifying this key,
it will throw an error. Of course, I'll have a list of changes
available, but that will still involve updating your code. Note: I'm
only looking at and changing the clarinet stencil(s), all the other
instruments I won't touch.
-- OR --
3. I'll create a new stencil "bass-clarinet-low-C" in which these
changes/additions/repairs are done and leave all the rest as-it-is.
This is more difficult because some things are intertwined with the
clarinet stencil (the "hole" problem might also force me to tear that
apart). From a user compatibility viewpoint this is of course most
desired, but from a code perspective it will keep lot's of things
there (and duplicated) which are unnecessary because in this case I
can't clean up.
My personal preference goes towards method 2.
All: Comments please.
Clarinettists and bass-clarinettists: are you using the diagrams? or
are you not using the diagrams for a specific reason?
Regards,
Wim.
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
