On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 1:04 PM David Bellows <[email protected]> wrote:
> Urs, > > >I think it would be good to add our stuff to the chart (not necessarily > much to the comments section). > > If the owner of the spreadsheet allows it, then definitely. I don't > know them personally so I don't know how they feel about that. I > suppose we could create our own version if they do not agree. I'm one > of the mods in that sub so I'll be making the chart a permanent link > in the sub so either way would work (and obviously we can link to it > from anywhere else we'd like). > > > not only check the given items with yes/no but also freely add to the > list > > I agree. The OP did ask for omissions/corrections so I would think > these (and others) would apply. > > > find a way to plug the "programmability" aspect (vs. applying plugins > after-the-fact), with things like complete extensibility with > syntactical means, conditional layout per engraving target ... (Maybe > this would even warrant a new tab in the sheet) > > One of Lilypond's biggest strengths! Working out meaningful/useful > parallels with the other programs would be the issue, I'm guessing? > Ok, everyone. I have finally gotten around to adding data about LilyPond. I felt pretty confident in the Notation and Engraving tabs, pretty solid marks there, but more uncertain about the Playback tab entries. I'm honestly not sure what they should be since many of the playback functionality is requisite on forming the content for playback rather than score output (i.e., using articulate.ly, restructuring repeats, etc.). Please feel free to look over my responses and let me know if you feel I've answered in error. Best, Abraham
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
