Re: svg output

2010-01-16 Thread David Raleigh Arnold
On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 20:09:36 + Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote: new feature (*cough* bugfix) What does that mean? Why wasn't svg output fixed when it broke? Is there is a problem with priorities? Doesn't lilypond's on line output, including the docs, look a million times

Re: svg output

2010-01-16 Thread Graham Percival
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 2:56 PM, David Raleigh Arnold d...@openguitar.com wrote: On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 20:09:36 + Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote: new feature (*cough* bugfix) What does that mean? It means that the SVG update introduced, and relied on, so many architectural

Tonic Sol-fa Notation

2010-01-16 Thread pound...@lineone.net
Hi, Is it ok to request a new feature if I offer to implement it? I have some old music which is printed in Tonic Sol-fa notation and have wanted to be able to print it using LilyPond for some time. I now think that LilyPond already has the ability to do this, but with quite a bit of tweaking

Re: Footers

2010-01-16 Thread Michael S. Morales
Thanks for the advice. I will try to use that tip. Regards, ~Michael~ If you have received this message in error, please notify the original sender immediately by return e-mail and delete this message, along with any attachments, from your computer/handheld. Thank you. On 1/15/2010 9:41

Re: GUI for Windows

2010-01-16 Thread Michael S. Morales
Thank you for the tips. I tried out jEdit with LilypondTool and found that to be very helpful. The manual also helped. Thanks for your advice. Regards, ~Michael~ If you have received this message in error, please notify the original sender immediately by return e-mail and delete this

Re: svg output

2010-01-16 Thread Hugh Myers
Keeping in mind that I agree with Graham on all points, here is a recent quote from Wikipedia: All major modern web browsers except Microsoft Internet Explorer support and render SVG markup directly.[3] To view SVG files in Internet Explorer, either users have to download and install a browser

bad executable for Win - 2.13.11

2010-01-16 Thread 胡海鹏 - Hu Haipeng
Hello, I downloaded 2.13.11, but the error dialog for whatever can't be 'read' appears when compiling. I recall 2.11.50 and 51 have this problem. Haipeng ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org

Re: bad executable for Win - 2.13.11

2010-01-16 Thread Patrick McCarty
On 2010-01-17, 胡海鹏 - Hu Haipeng wrote: I downloaded 2.13.11, but the error dialog for whatever can't be 'read' appears when compiling. I recall 2.11.50 and 51 have this problem. This doesn't sound good. Does this occur for any input file? Did you try removing the font cache first? I'll try

Re: Part name with staff groups/grand staff

2010-01-16 Thread Patrick Horgan
Mats Bengtsson wrote: You mean like the following example? Doesn't work with odd numbers of staffs. Patrick ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re:Re: bad executable for Win - 2.13.11

2010-01-16 Thread 胡海鹏 - Hu Haipeng
Done, but the error's still here. Haipeng ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Re: bad executable for Win - 2.13.11

2010-01-16 Thread Patrick McCarty
2010/1/16 胡海鹏 - Hu Haipeng hhpmu...@163.com: Done, but the error's still here. I just tested 2.13.11 on Windows XP by compiling the simple input file below, and I don't see an error message during compilation. %% BEGIN %% \version 2.13.11 { c } %% END %% Since I can't reproduce your problem,