Hello, list!
08.02.2013 12:55, Werner LEMBERG пишет:
As a longtime lilypond user, I'm in inclined to agree with Werner's
implication (I hope I'm not misreading!). Lilypond is so good
there's not much point in using anything else.
I won't go that far, but looking at the documentation of the `music'
preprocessor it is clear that Lilypond is far superior. I suspect
that `music' doesn't support multiple staves or multiple voices.
I am not competent in these topics, but `music' somehow attracted my
attention, because I was very interested and curious in the way scores
can be typesetted using troff engine. Most of all the language it
proposed raised an interest, not its typographic features, since I
understand that troff can do placement of right glyphs at the right
places and draw lines, if the user requests them in the right order :-)
One interesting thing about Foxley worth noting: it seems that
typesetting was not their primary goal. They wanted to analyse tunes
with statistical methods (clustering, distribution and so on), while
obtaining printable papers looks like a side-effect of their research
and a nice add-on to the package.
This might be the reason it is not advanced as Lilypond.
(Mind you, I have of late been seduced by the charms of a WYSIWYG
score editor called Musescore.)
:-) I much prefer Lilypond's text input for all my works.
No doubt, Lilypond is much superior and with extensive high-quality
documentation; even me -- a-non-musician -- may understand and master
musical typography. Still `music' looks cute and compact for me, from
the point of `little language' paradigm of the unix way and I am curious
of its internals. Unfortunately, I see no sources anywhere.
--
Grisha
