Urs Liska <[email protected]> writes:
[ a whole lot of very good observations, ideas and suggestions ]
> Basically a "package" can provide arbitrary code to be included.
> It can for example provide
> - overrides to modify the output appearance (classic "stylesheet")
> - new commands / functionality
> - alternative header definitions with arbitrary header fields
> - engravers or anything one would otherwise include too.
1. From a user perspective, this is all "style". Terms like package and
class will scare away (new) users.
2. All this can already be done with \include .
> Differences to \include
> - search path management (recursive search)
So add search path management for \include .
> - allow options:
> e.g. (in LaTeX syntax)
> - \usepackage[font="Libre Baskerville"]{mySongbookHeader}
Yikes no. Putting options before the classname is one of the most
disgusting 'features' of LaTeX. More LilyPond-like would be
\include "mySongbookHeader" \with {
\override font = "Libre Baskerville"
}
Yes, it's more verbose, but it's logical and completely in line with
current LP syntax.
-- Johan
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
