Re: [Notensatz im 21. Jahrhundert] edition-engraver session, Sunday Jan 19 @ 15:30
Hi Urs (et al.), > This is a very good idea, and it is good you brought it up for > discussion. I had a very similar plan with regard to the openLilyLib > presentation on Sunday. Excellent! > I think the main target audience for the Sunday topics is people who > are very much into LilyPond and its development anyway. Probably there > are random participants, but anybody who stays for another night will > very much have a quite specific reason to do so. Nobody will need to > learn at that point what the edition-engraver or openLilyLib are Well, with my 10 minutes, I’m still going to try not to leave someone "in the dust"… =) > Given what I wrote above I can imagine you could even reduce that to > not more than 10 minutes by sending example files before. I’ll do that. > I would put “solving low-level technical issues” to the bottom of that > list. This is something that may not be too suitable for discussion in > the larger group since (I suspect) nobody except Jan-Peter will be able > to discuss such issues spontaneously. I suppose I mean more like J-P asking “Why, when I try to make the EE do X, it does Y?”, and David K saying “Well, Lilypond sees X as Z, so you need to write Z->X first” or whatever. > What I think would be most helpful and making most of the “historic > situation“ would be discussing ways how to get the edition-engraver > integrated in LilyPond. Yes. Would love that. > Integration of the edition-engraver in Frescobaldi is another issue > with additional implications. We won't directly support it until it is > integrated in LilyPond. Ah. It’s good to know the order of operations on that. > However, there is one road that can be pursued, > and that is Frescobaldi's new extension API. That’s what I was thinking. > What do you think? I like the direction that day is heading in. Thanks, Kieren. Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his) ‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info ‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info
Re: [Notensatz im 21. Jahrhundert] edition-engraver session, Sunday Jan 19 @ 15:30
> 11:15 Frescobaldi > 15:30 openLilyLib > 16:00 edition-engraver Program changed accordingly; I now use »Vormittag« and »Nachmittag« as block names. Werner
Re: [Notensatz im 21. Jahrhundert] edition-engraver session, Sunday Jan 19 @ 15:30
Am Sa., 11. Jan. 2020 um 20:45 Uhr schrieb Urs Liska : > I think the main target audience for the Sunday topics is people who > are very much into LilyPond and its development anyway. Probably there > are random participants, but anybody who stays for another night will > very much have a quite specific reason to do so. Nobody will need to > learn at that point what the edition-engraver or openLilyLib are > generally. Well, my talk is mostly held out of a user's point of view and mostly addresses advanced users and users on the way to be advanced. :) Anyway, I don't know much about the edition-engraver (never used it myself), but I support the idea to bundle talks about it. Would be interesting to hear about it from different people shedding light on it from different sides. Cheers, Harm
Re: [Notensatz im 21. Jahrhundert] edition-engraver session, Sunday Jan 19 @ 15:30
Hi Kieren, Am Samstag, den 11.01.2020, 11:03 -0500 schrieb Kieren MacMillan: > Hello colleagues! > > I just had a wonderful video-chat with Jan-Peter, as part of the > preparations for my session “The Edition-Engraver: The benefits and > limitations of tweaking LilyPond scores” at next week’s > [un]conference. > > Rather than simply talk for thirty minutes about how I use the > edition-engraver, I feel the very best use of this historic > opportunity — having so many important Lilypond developers together > in one place at one time — is to dedicate some portion of my session > time to a discussion/brainstorm regarding the current roadblocks > facing the edition-engraver, both technically and (to a much lesser > extent) from the perspective of wider adoption and use. This is a very good idea, and it is good you brought it up for discussion. I had a very similar plan with regard to the openLilyLib presentation on Sunday. I think the main target audience for the Sunday topics is people who are very much into LilyPond and its development anyway. Probably there are random participants, but anybody who stays for another night will very much have a quite specific reason to do so. Nobody will need to learn at that point what the edition-engraver or openLilyLib are generally. > > I’m proposing I spend the first 10-15 minutes giving a more-or-less > traditional presentation: an introduction to the extension/framework, > examples of usage, best practices when coding with the EE, and so > forth. Given what I wrote above I can imagine you could even reduce that to not more than 10 minutes by sending example files before. > Then, in the second "half" of the time slot, I facilitate/mediate a > discussion — primarily between Jan-Peter and the main Lilypond and > Frescobaldi development teams — in which we brainstorm how to bring > the EE to its greatest potential, solve low-level technical issues, > deeply integrate it in Frescobaldi, etc. The goal of this second > section would not be to have solved the problems in 15-20 minutes, of > course, but would just provide a chance for everyone to end up on the > same page about this powerful tool and how it might move forward. I would put “solving low-level technical issues” to the bottom of that list. This is something that may not be too suitable for discussion in the larger group since (I suspect) nobody except Jan-Peter will be able to discuss such issues spontaneously. What I think would be most helpful and making most of the “historic situation“ would be discussing ways how to get the edition-engraver integrated in LilyPond. This is raised every now and then, everybody (I think) agrees to that, but it doesn't really have any substantial progress. Which is - just like the deplorable state of openLilyLib's documentation - due to the fact that Jan-Peter won't be able to achieve that on his own and that never any community effort has gained any traction. Integration of the edition-engraver in Frescobaldi is another issue with additional implications. We won't directly support it until it is integrated in LilyPond. The only way to hard-code edition-engraver support into Frescobaldi would be to include the code directly in the Frescobaldi code, as we did with the code for the Layout Control Mode. But I think everybody will agree that such a fork (which it would effecitvely be) is a terrible idea. However, there is one road that can be pursued, and that is Frescobaldi's new extension API. I plan (have already old code that could be adapted) to create an openLilyLib extension. This will allow the Frescobaldi user to directly download, install and manage openLilyLib and its packages and should also provide tools (shortcuts, context menu items and maybe something like the Quick Insert Panel) to simplify the inclusion of openLilyLib (a GUI for selecting and creating the package loading code). On top of that (but I haven't thought this through) that basic extension will provide an infrastructure/API for *other* extensions that may be added for specific packages. The prime use case *I* am thinking of will be the scholarLY package, i.e. an annotation editor/viewer. But such a package for the edition-engraver will also be extremely helpful. > > Jan-Peter is on board for this approach. How does it sound to > everyone else? Please let us know if you plan to attend, and if so > whether you’d be an interested/willing participant in a > brainstorm/discussion. > I think the above makes clear that I'm very much in favor of your suggestion. However, I suggest we reorder the program for Sunday, and I think it's not an issue to do that at this point. Regardless of the actual points in time the three slots should be in the order Frescobaldi => openLilyLib => edition-engraver. The Frescobaldi part will introduce the extension concept, and openLilyLib is the framework in which the edition-engraver operates (and any discussion about its future should build upon the discussion of
[Notensatz im 21. Jahrhundert] edition-engraver session, Sunday Jan 19 @ 15:30
Hello colleagues! I just had a wonderful video-chat with Jan-Peter, as part of the preparations for my session “The Edition-Engraver: The benefits and limitations of tweaking LilyPond scores” at next week’s [un]conference. Rather than simply talk for thirty minutes about how I use the edition-engraver, I feel the very best use of this historic opportunity — having so many important Lilypond developers together in one place at one time — is to dedicate some portion of my session time to a discussion/brainstorm regarding the current roadblocks facing the edition-engraver, both technically and (to a much lesser extent) from the perspective of wider adoption and use. I’m proposing I spend the first 10-15 minutes giving a more-or-less traditional presentation: an introduction to the extension/framework, examples of usage, best practices when coding with the EE, and so forth. Then, in the second "half" of the time slot, I facilitate/mediate a discussion — primarily between Jan-Peter and the main Lilypond and Frescobaldi development teams — in which we brainstorm how to bring the EE to its greatest potential, solve low-level technical issues, deeply integrate it in Frescobaldi, etc. The goal of this second section would not be to have solved the problems in 15-20 minutes, of course, but would just provide a chance for everyone to end up on the same page about this powerful tool and how it might move forward. Jan-Peter is on board for this approach. How does it sound to everyone else? Please let us know if you plan to attend, and if so whether you’d be an interested/willing participant in a brainstorm/discussion. Really looking forward to seeing all of you next week! Best, Kieren. Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his) ‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info ‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info
