On 2018-09-12 1:33 am, Urs Liska wrote:
Am 12.09.2018 um 10:17 schrieb Peter Toye:
Wednesday, September 12, 2018, 7:05:56 AM, Urs Liska wrote:
> I fully agree with Simon's description but want
> to add one more question
> to it:
...
*This link
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2016-05/msg00149.htmlseems
to do what you want for page numbering, although it puts the page
numbers in the centre of the page rather than the left & right corners
and doesn't adjust margins. Thanks to "Hwaen Ch'uqi"
<hwaench...@gmail.com> for this.
Thank you for this link, which indeed provides a workable part of a
solution.
I think one can create a streamlined tool for this task. But that
doesn't make the feature request invalid, just less urgent.
I was not questioning the validity of the request, but rather I wanted
to double-check its scope.
From what I have seen, there is nothing that LilyPond *needs* to be
modified for, as setting margins and indicating page numbers is already
there. The problem is that it is not *easy* to do. One has to manually
set the margins for the primo and secondo parts and ensure they mirror
the values correctly. Also, it may be non-obvious to some using Scheme
to adjust the page numbering as rendered. But regardless of this
non-obviousness, LilyPond is quite malleable and up to the task.
NOTE: When doing primo/secondo layout by hand, you would also need to
make sure that LilyPond uses the same settings for "odd" and "even"
paper variables, since each part is intended to be strictly left or
right-facing. LilyPond would have no idea that you ultimately intend to
intermingle the pages of two PDFs together.
So, I am all for adding in support to make the process more direct and
accessible. And it seems like something that should be easy enough to
do, given a suitable interface with appropriate semantics defined.
Well, I say "easy enough", because as far as page numbering and margins
are concerned, I am thinking this *should* be fairly straightforward.
Of course for me to say something like that, I have probably just put my
name into the hat for doing the engineering work. ;-)
But to circle back, I wanted to ensure that we were capturing the
entirety of what is entailed in primo/secondo layout in either within
the scope of a single request or a series of related requests, whichever
scheme is appropriate for how this project runs. It sounds like the
latter is preferred here, with finer grain/narrower scope on requests.
You in fact mentioned yet another issue which is the collating of the
two parts' pages into a single output document. I am fairly certain
that external tooling can handle this task, but again it might be
something that LilyPond could support. For instance, if LilyPond can be
made to coordinate the automatic synchronization of page breaks, then it
makes sense for LilyPond also to output the parts interleaved. This
though assumes that folks *want* collation. It could very well end up
an optional feature to enable/disable as desired.
P.S. My Italian is rather lacking, so I only just realized I have been
saying "primo/secondo" as opposed to "prima/seconda". Is this a case of
grammatical gender, or have I been using the wrong part of speech?
-- Aaron Hill
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
