> > lilypond --generate-latex-data foo.ly > foo.tex
> > latex foo.tex
> > lilypond --use-latex-data foo.ly
>
> This approach seems rather arcane to me.
`Arcane'? Please explain. Any better idea to get string dimensions
from TeX currently?
> However, with Scheme functions, you can already
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > doesn't do print. I'm not sure where Omega is standing, last time I
> > looked, development wasn't moving much.
>
> You want to send LaTeX code to a library and getting back small EPS
> files? This is non-trivial due to the embedded fonts. IMHO the
No, I want to s
> > How will you handle arbitrary text strings too complex to be
> > handled by lilypond itself (exotic scripts, mathematics, etc.)?
>
> We'll leave the TeX output intact, but users will have to write
> their own glue/titling code (or use lilypond-book).
>
> In a far future, I hope that we can li
Han-Wen,
On 3/15/2004 12:20 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>>>necessary? If not, then we can skip that option, and simply never
>>>merge if styles are different.
>>
>>I considered that, but I saw the pattern for different heads and
>>different dottings. Not having much
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > necessary? If not, then we can skip that option, and simply never
> > merge if styles are different.
>
> I considered that, but I saw the pattern for different heads and
> different dottings. Not having much choral experience (where I
> suspect this comes into play)
On 3/13/2004 6:00 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Patch looks OK in principle, but I have some further questions and comments.
>
Thanks. Any comments are appreciated.
> * Can you think of any case where merge-differently-fonted is
> necessary? If not, then we can skip that option, and simply nev
Ferenc Wagner writes:
>> Yes. If possible - the idea is that the lilypond package
>> has the info files without .png, and lilypond-doc has the
>> PNGs for those info files.
>
> And the replacement info files which reference those PNGs, I
> guess.
There is not really a need to package the info fil
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>> now we have a conventional (out/*, image alt only) and www
>> (out-www/*, image src present) Info documentation. Should
>> the files of the latter override those of the former when
>> installed?
>
> Yes. If possible -
Hi Han-Wen,
Thanks for your response.
The second option is what I think is best.
The Braille reads like unbroken text and is not structured positionally in
music like usual notation, since this kind of visual structure has no meaning
to a blind person.
If you care to look at the examples on ht
