On Thursday 06 October 2005 15:07, Peter Mogensen wrote: > Peter Mogensen wrote: > > Correct... But some decision needs to be made about in which direction > > the notation capabilities of RG should develop. You could manage a lot > > of the currently missing features like repeats and score-layout with > > dialogues of options and segment properties. > > That would give a nice WYSIWYG notation editor, but probaby be just as > > powerful and easier to implement. > > Sorry... It should have read: "That would NOT give a nice WYSIWYG..." > (and "probably")
If it's easier to do, that's a big argument for it! It really comes down to whether RG is a sequencer with very good notation capabilities, or a notation package which can sequence. The former is certainly where it is at the minute, and there seems no reason to change that substantially. So improving the package by adding these additional features, even if they're mainly accessed from the sequencer rather than the notation side, is a good thing - the elegance of the interface is less important than having the feature, IMHO. -- Pob hwyl / Best wishes Kevin Donnelly www.kyfieithu.co.uk - Meddalwedd Rhydd yn Gymraeg www.cymrux.org.uk - Linux Cymraeg ar un CD ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
