Hi,
2013/5/12 David Kastrup :
> David Nalesnik writes:
>
> [\shape]
>
>> As I said above, it is most useful when such layout details as line and
>> page breaks are settled--as, of course, is directly overriding control
>> points,
>
> Well, it's good that we have it, and bad that we need it.
That
David Nalesnik writes:
[\shape]
> As I said above, it is most useful when such layout details as line and
> page breaks are settled--as, of course, is directly overriding control
> points,
Well, it's good that we have it, and bad that we need it.
--
David Kastrup
Am 12.05.2013 13:35, schrieb David Nalesnik:
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 11:42 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
Janek Warcho? writes:
2013/5/11 David Kastrup :
Janek Warcho? writes:
my experience (particularly with Fried project) shows that
with regard to slurs and ties, LilyPond is very far from au
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 11:42 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Janek Warchoł writes:
>
> > 2013/5/11 David Kastrup :
> >> Janek Warchoł writes:
> >>> my experience (particularly with Fried project) shows that
> >>> with regard to slurs and ties, LilyPond is very far from automated
> >>> typesetting.
Janek Warchoł writes:
> 2013/5/11 David Kastrup :
>> Janek Warchoł writes:
>>> my experience (particularly with Fried project) shows that
>>> with regard to slurs and ties, LilyPond is very far from automated
>>> typesetting. If you want publication quality, you _have_ to tweak the
>>> output qu
Hello,
> There will always be a need to change things, position objects to a user's
> preference.
In that regard, it's really too bad the extremely-useful 'head' and 'stem'
positioning options are no longer in Lilypond…
A huge percentage of the slur tweaks I need to add are simply re-positioni
2013/5/11 David Kastrup :
> Janek Warchoł writes:
>> my experience (particularly with Fried project) shows that
>> with regard to slurs and ties, LilyPond is very far from automated
>> typesetting. If you want publication quality, you _have_ to tweak the
>> output quite heavily - would you rather
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 1:58 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Janek Warchoł writes:
>
> > 2013/5/10 David Kastrup :
> >> Janek Warchoł writes:
> >>> I'm wondering whether we should advertise \shape more. It's
> >>> tremendously helpful, and yet despite it had been added ~1 year ago
> >>> (IIRC) many
Janek Warchoł writes:
> Sure, we're working on it with Urs (progressing slowly). It'd be nice
> for LilyPond Report, but frankly i think we should rather create a
> multi-author blog - it would be easier to keep it active.
A "multi-author blog" sounds pretty much the same as a journal except
th
Am 11.05.2013 11:15, schrieb Janek Warchoł:
2013/5/11 Federico Bruni :
2013/5/11 Janek Warchoł
...
Quite frankly, if we didn't have \shape, i'd say that LilyPond was
incapable of handling Fried project :(
I think I missed this project, all I can find is this:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/htm
2013/5/11 Federico Bruni :
>
> 2013/5/11 Janek Warchoł
>>
>> I'm 100% for automated typesetting: it's my dream and the very reason
>> why i'm using LilyPond.
>> However, my experience (particularly with Fried project) shows that
>> with regard to slurs and ties, LilyPond is very far from automated
2013/5/11 Janek Warchoł
> I'm 100% for automated typesetting: it's my dream and the very reason
> why i'm using LilyPond.
> However, my experience (particularly with Fried project) shows that
> with regard to slurs and ties, LilyPond is very far from automated
> typesetting. If you want publicati
Janek Warchoł writes:
> 2013/5/10 David Kastrup :
>> Janek Warchoł writes:
>>> I'm wondering whether we should advertise \shape more. It's
>>> tremendously helpful, and yet despite it had been added ~1 year ago
>>> (IIRC) many users don't know about it.
>>
>> I'm somewhat dubious about "tremend
Hi,
2013/5/10 David Kastrup :
> Janek Warchoł writes:
>> I'm wondering whether we should advertise \shape more. It's
>> tremendously helpful, and yet despite it had been added ~1 year ago
>> (IIRC) many users don't know about it.
>
> I'm somewhat dubious about "tremendously helpful" as it defeat
On 10/05/13 15:40, Urs Liska wrote:
Am 10.05.2013 16:36, schrieb Alberto Simões:
On 10/05/13 15:27, David Kastrup wrote:
Alberto Simões writes:
For those interested in the \shape usage, this is what I was working
in:
http://www.musica-liturgica.net/viewfull.pl/375
I'd probably not le
Am 10.05.2013 16:36, schrieb Alberto Simões:
On 10/05/13 15:27, David Kastrup wrote:
Alberto Simões writes:
For those interested in the \shape usage, this is what I was working
in:
http://www.musica-liturgica.net/viewfull.pl/375
I'd probably not let the one voice jump around staves so
On 10/05/13 15:27, David Kastrup wrote:
Alberto Simões writes:
For those interested in the \shape usage, this is what I was working in:
http://www.musica-liturgica.net/viewfull.pl/375
I'd probably not let the one voice jump around staves so much. Just
keep it in the top staff, typesetti
Alberto Simões writes:
> For those interested in the \shape usage, this is what I was working in:
> http://www.musica-liturgica.net/viewfull.pl/375
I'd probably not let the one voice jump around staves so much. Just
keep it in the top staff, typesetting it with \voiceFour instead of
\voiceTwo
On 10/05/13 14:55, David Kastrup wrote:
Alberto Simões writes:
On 10/05/13 14:42, David Nalesnik wrote:
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Alberto Simões
mailto:al...@alfarrabio.di.uminho.pt>>
wrote:
Probably the fact that I am running 2.16. Updating.
\shape will in fact work with 2
Alberto Simões writes:
> On 10/05/13 14:42, David Nalesnik wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Alberto Simões
>> mailto:al...@alfarrabio.di.uminho.pt>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Probably the fact that I am running 2.16. Updating.
>>
>>
>> \shape will in fact work with 2.16. You just need
Janek Warchoł writes:
> I'm wondering whether we should advertise \shape more. It's
> tremendously helpful, and yet despite it had been added ~1 year ago
> (IIRC) many users don't know about it.
I'm somewhat dubious about "tremendously helpful" as it defeats
automated typesetting. And "had bee
On 10/05/13 14:42, David Nalesnik wrote:
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Alberto Simões
mailto:al...@alfarrabio.di.uminho.pt>>
wrote:
Probably the fact that I am running 2.16. Updating.
\shape will in fact work with 2.16. You just need to use a different
ordering of the arguments:
\
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Alberto Simões <
al...@alfarrabio.di.uminho.pt> wrote:
>
>
> Probably the fact that I am running 2.16. Updating.
\shape will in fact work with 2.16. You just need to use a different
ordering of the arguments:
\shape Slur #'((0 . 0) (0 . 0) (0 . 0) (0 . 0))
(The
2013/5/10 Alberto Simões :
>
>
> On 10/05/13 14:29, Janek Warchoł wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> 2013/5/10 Alberto Simões :
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/05/13 14:17, Urs Liska wrote:
Am 10.05.2013 15:15, schrieb Alberto Simões:
>
>
>>> The snippet in
>>> http:/
On 10/05/13 14:34, Alberto Simões wrote:
On 10/05/13 14:29, Janek Warchoł wrote:
Hi,
2013/5/10 Alberto Simões :
On 10/05/13 14:17, Urs Liska wrote:
Am 10.05.2013 15:15, schrieb Alberto Simões:
The snippet in
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/__Snippet?id=748
And
On 10/05/13 14:29, Janek Warchoł wrote:
Hi,
2013/5/10 Alberto Simões :
On 10/05/13 14:17, Urs Liska wrote:
Am 10.05.2013 15:15, schrieb Alberto Simões:
The snippet in
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/__Snippet?id=748
And unfortunately it doesn't work pretty well o
26 matches
Mail list logo
