Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 10/13/10 2:40 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
The point is that we want a sane way of specifying document layout
parameters. The current naming scheme resembles that desire. The
current code not. Adapting the naming scheme to the
David Kastrup wrote Thursday, October 14, 2010 8:42 AM
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 10/13/10 2:40 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
The point is that we want a sane way of specifying document
layout
parameters. The current naming scheme resembles that desire.
The
Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk writes:
Although this is a good point, the problem is not as
stark as this might suggest. There are many situations
when writing LilyPond code when score-wide settings are
inappropriate. This is just another. \override permits
appropriate setting to be
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 9:42 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Let me put it bluntly: the new scheme cements the decision to make
markups and titles have the same spacing.
Greetings David,
Quoting Mark (the man through whom the scandal cometh!) in the very
first mail in this thread,
Valentin Villenave valen...@villenave.net writes:
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 9:42 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Let me put it bluntly: the new scheme cements the decision to make
markups and titles have the same spacing.
Greetings David,
Quoting Mark (the man through whom the scandal
David Kastrup wrote Thursday, October 14, 2010 10:05 AM
Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk writes:
Although this is a good point, the problem is not as
stark as this might suggest. There are many situations
when writing LilyPond code when score-wide settings are
inappropriate. This is
David Kastrup wrote:
In short, we are going down a road now where any
user-visible improvement (for which the necessity is
clear) will become increasingly painful to do for both
developers and users.
Since obviously I am alone with this opinion among the
developers, I would suggest polling
Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
In short, we are going down a road now where any
user-visible improvement (for which the necessity is
clear) will become increasingly painful to do for both
developers and users.
Since obviously I am alone with this opinion
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 07:57:02AM -0700, Mark Polesky wrote:
David Kastrup wrote:
In short, we are going down a road now where any
user-visible improvement (for which the necessity is
clear) will become increasingly painful to do for both
developers and users.
Sure. Let's bite the
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com wrote:
I think this is a good time to rethink how LilyPond uses the
\markup command. Perhaps the code is too casual in this
respect? It would be nice instead to have a more semantic
command vocabulary to replace top-level
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes:
Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
The main problem I see with that naming scheme is that it
does not reflect score sheet design, but the current
implementation.
[...]
So the proposed scheme ties something presented as
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes:
So my fear is that the new scheme is both strictly logical, and not
useful for specifying a coherent document layout.
But the new scheme is just a restatement (renaming) of the current scheme.
Mark is not trying to *redo* the document layout algorithms;
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes:
So my fear is that the new scheme is both strictly logical, and not
useful for specifying a coherent document layout.
But the new scheme is just a restatement (renaming) of the current
scheme.
The renaming
On 10/13/10 8:29 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes:
So my fear is that the new scheme is both strictly logical, and not
useful for specifying a coherent document layout.
But the new scheme is just a
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 10/13/10 8:29 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes:
So my fear is that the new scheme is both strictly logical, and not
useful for specifying a coherent document
On 10/13/10 2:40 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 10/13/10 8:29 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes:
So my fear is that the new scheme is both strictly
On 2010-10-09 17:46, Mark Polesky wrote:
CURRENT NAME PROPOSED NAME
-
top-system top-system
top-title top-markup
between-title markup-markup
after-titlemarkup-system
between-system system-system
Hello,
On 12/10/2010 10:13, Alexander Kobel wrote:
On 2010-10-09 17:46, Mark Polesky wrote:
CURRENT NAME PROPOSED NAME
-
top-system top-system
top-title top-markup
between-title markup-markup
after-title markup-system
between-system system-system
before-title
James james.l...@datacore.com writes:
Hello,
On 12/10/2010 10:13, Alexander Kobel wrote:
On 2010-10-09 17:46, Mark Polesky wrote:
CURRENT NAME PROPOSED NAME
-
top-system top-system
top-title top-markup
between-title markup-markup
after-title markup-system
On Tue 12 Oct 2010, 13:54 David Kastrup wrote:
James james.l...@datacore.com writes:
top-system top-system
top-title top-markup
between-title markup-markup
after-title markup-system
between-system system-system
before-title system-markup
bottom-system system-bottom
Hello,
On 12/10/2010 12:54, David Kastrup wrote:
Jamesjames.l...@datacore.com writes:
Hello,
On 12/10/2010 10:13, Alexander Kobel wrote:
On 2010-10-09 17:46, Mark Polesky wrote:
CURRENT NAME PROPOSED NAME
-
top-system top-system
top-title top-markup
between-title
Hi James,
I still think a *user* (not programmer or code developer) is going to really
get frustrated when they don't know what a system is i.e... 'oh you mean the
stuff with the notes in...we call that a 'score' where I come from.
The entire music engraving world -- not just Lilypond, but
On 2010-10-12 14:27, James wrote:
On 12/10/2010 12:54, David Kastrup wrote:
Jamesjames.l...@datacore.com writes:
Why do we have
'top-system' but 'system-bottom' and not instead, 'bottom-system'?
Because there is no system after the bottom?
?
I'll stop if I am really showing my ignorance
James wrote Tuesday, October 12, 2010 1:27 PM
On 12/10/2010 12:54, David Kastrup wrote:
Jamesjames.l...@datacore.com writes:
Hello,
On 12/10/2010 10:13, Alexander Kobel wrote:
On 2010-10-09 17:46, Mark Polesky wrote:
CURRENT NAME PROPOSED NAME
-
top-system
Alexander Kobel n...@a-kobel.de writes:
On 2010-10-09 17:46, Mark Polesky wrote:
CURRENT NAME PROPOSED NAME
-
top-system top-system
top-title top-markup
between-title markup-markup
after-title
David Kastrup wrote:
The main problem I see with that naming scheme is that it
does not reflect score sheet design, but the current
implementation.
[...]
So the proposed scheme ties something presented as document
spacing parameters into internal details of their
implementation.
What
Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
The main problem I see with that naming scheme is that it
does not reflect score sheet design, but the current
implementation.
[...]
So the proposed scheme ties something presented as document
spacing parameters into
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 02:24:37PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
I'll stop if I am really showing my ignorance (I am not a code
developer),
I'm afraid you're showing your ignorance as a musician.
System and score are not synonomous. A system is a line
of music which includes the all the
On 12/10/10 00:55, Graham Percival wrote:
Why not push it as one patch? It seems like all of those pieces need
to be accomplished in order to have a fully-buildable release (i.e. if the
variable names in lilypond don't match the variable names in the docs,
make doc will fail.
If he has
On 12/10/10 14:02, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi James,
I still think a *user* (not programmer or code developer) is going to really
get frustrated when they don't know what a system is i.e... 'oh you mean the
stuff with the notes in...we call that a 'score' where I come from.
The entire
On 10/12/10 4:20 PM, Wols Lists antli...@youngman.org.uk wrote:
On 12/10/10 14:02, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi James,
I still think a *user* (not programmer or code developer) is going to really
get frustrated when they don't know what a system is i.e... 'oh you mean the
stuff with the
On 12/10/10 22:05, Graham Percival wrote:
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 02:24:37PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
I'll stop if I am really showing my ignorance (I am not a code
developer),
I'm afraid you're showing your ignorance as a musician.
System and score are not synonomous. A system is a
On 2010-10-13 00:20, Wols Lists wrote:
On 12/10/10 14:02, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi James,
[...]
If Lilypond users are confused because they don't have an understanding of that
basic and universal terminology, they should read (1) some engraving books, and
(2) the Lilypond introductory
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 04:23:49PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 10/12/10 4:20 PM, Wols Lists antli...@youngman.org.uk wrote:
For a musician to get that wrong is as seriously incompetent as for a
computer guy to refer to a hard disk as ram (I know the
man-in-the-street tends to call
On 2010-10-13 00:27, Wols Lists wrote:
Add stave to this. Actually, I would have defined a stave as a line of
music, and a system as a group of linked staves played simultaneously.
But that all depends on how you understand the word line :-)
Stave or staff?! Are these identical? I thought
On 10/12/10 4:27 PM, Wols Lists antli...@youngman.org.uk wrote:
On 12/10/10 22:05, Graham Percival wrote:
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 02:24:37PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
I'll stop if I am really showing my ignorance (I am not a code
developer),
I'm afraid you're showing your ignorance as
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 12:45:33AM +0200, Alexander Kobel wrote:
On 2010-10-13 00:27, Wols Lists wrote:
Add stave to this. Actually, I would have defined a stave as a line of
music, and a system as a group of linked staves played simultaneously.
But that all depends on how you understand the
-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: names of vertical spacing dimensions
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 04:23:49PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 10/12/10 4:20 PM, Wols Lists antli...@youngman.org.uk wrote:
For a musician to get that wrong is as seriously incompetent as for a
computer guy to refer
Graham Percival
Yes, but I see some weaknesses in our docs.
- Glossary: staff should link to system
- Glossary: both staff and system could benefit from images
- Learning: add some link(s) to Glossary: system. Currently we
have none!
gperc...@futoi:~/src/lilypond/Documentation/learning$
On 12/10/10 23:44, Graham Percival wrote:
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 04:23:49PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 10/12/10 4:20 PM, Wols Lists antli...@youngman.org.uk wrote:
For a musician to get that wrong is as seriously incompetent as for a
computer guy to refer to a hard disk as ram (I know
On 12/10/10 23:45, Alexander Kobel wrote:
On 2010-10-13 00:27, Wols Lists wrote:
Add stave to this. Actually, I would have defined a stave as a line of
music, and a system as a group of linked staves played simultaneously.
But that all depends on how you understand the word line :-)
Stave
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 04:58:42PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
it is staff and staves, according to the GDP rules:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2007-09/msg00240.html
Thanks! James, could you send me a patch for the CG?
Of course, Neil considered that a US bias (with a
On 10/10/10 12:56 PM, Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com wrote:
Here's an updated patch set for review:
http://codereview.appspot.com/2303044/
It's organized into 5 commits on my local branch:
1) Rename vertical spacing dimensions.
2) Update convert-ly (vertical spacing).
3) Run
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
On 10/10/10 12:56 PM, Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com wrote:
...but Rietveld meshed them all into one. So, once
approved, I'll push it as a set of patches, not just one.
Why not push it as one patch? It seems like
Here's an updated patch set for review:
http://codereview.appspot.com/2303044/
It's organized into 5 commits on my local branch:
1) Rename vertical spacing dimensions.
2) Update convert-ly (vertical spacing).
3) Run convert-ly on affected regtests (vert. spacing).
4) Revise regtest texidoc
(David, see the note at the end of this post)
It's not that I want to split hairs; I want to get the new
variable names right the first time. My apologies to any of
you who are getting tired with this process. My current
(and hopefully final) proposal is now this:
CURRENT NAME
On 10/9/10 9:46 AM, Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com wrote:
* * * * * * * * * *
before-title-spacing applies to these cases:
1) from last system in a score to top-level markup.
2) from last system of one score to scoreTitleMarkup of
another score.
Within the proposed naming scheme,
On 10/9/10 10:52 AM, Joe Neeman joenee...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
On 10/9/10 9:46 AM, Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com wrote:
* * * * * * * * * *
before-title-spacing applies to these cases:
1) from last system in
On Sat, Oct 09, 2010 at 05:50:49PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
Mark Polesky wrote Saturday, October 09, 2010 4:46 PM
It's not that I want to split hairs; I want to get the new
variable names right the first time. My apologies to any of
you who are getting tired with this process.
%%% in
Carl Sorensen wrote:
Does before-title-spacing apply at the top of the first
page, or only between scores?
before-title-spacing does *not* apply at the top of the
first page, even when print-first-page-number is #t (to
force a header).
Does between-scores-system-spacing apply only to the case
(Carl et al.: please read at least the last paragraph!)
Xavier Scheuer wrote:
The previous names were quite easy to understand (although
it was a bit difficult due to the large number of such
variables) but I don't catch at first sight the meaning of
the new proposed ones...
Well, in the new
Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com writes:
(Carl et al.: please read at least the last paragraph!)
Xavier Scheuer wrote:
The previous names were quite easy to understand (although
it was a bit difficult due to the large number of such
variables) but I don't catch at first sight the meaning
On 2010-10-06 17:46, Mark Polesky wrote:
I also think the name 'space is misleading; I propose
'default-distance. Opinions?
I can't see why 'space should be misleading, but that might just be that
I'm accustomed to it by now. It's shorter, but anything other is okay
as well.
(Of course,
IIUC, making all of these changes should be done in 5 steps:
1) rename the variables in the code files
2) change 'space to 'default-distance* in the code files
3) write rules for convert-ly
4) update affected regtests (?)
5) update the docs
*or Alexander's optimal-distance (still open to debate)
Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com writes:
IIUC, making all of these changes should be done in 5 steps:
1) rename the variables in the code files
2) change 'space to 'default-distance* in the code files
3) write rules for convert-ly
4) update affected regtests (?)
5) update the docs
*or
On 10/7/10 1:44 AM, Alexander Kobel n...@a-kobel.de wrote:
On 2010-10-06 17:46, Mark Polesky wrote:
I also think the name 'space is misleading; I propose
'default-distance. Opinions?
I can't see why 'space should be misleading, but that might just be that
I'm accustomed to it by now.
On 2010-10-07 15:53, Carl Sorensen wrote:
I like base-; it's shorter to type, and it still carries the right
connotation.
+1.
Cheers,
Alexander
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
On 10/7/10 7:51 AM, Valentin Villenave valen...@villenave.net wrote:
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
I think I'd prefer desired-distance to optimal-distance. optimal distance
is what the algorithms actually end up with, as a tradeoff between desired
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
I think I'd prefer desired-distance to optimal-distance. optimal distance
is what the algorithms actually end up with, as a tradeoff between desired
distance and the amount of stuff on a page.
How about requested- rather
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 10/7/10 7:51 AM, Valentin Villenave valen...@villenave.net wrote:
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 3:41 PM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
I think I'd prefer desired-distance to optimal-distance. optimal distance
is what the algorithms actually end
Enough votes are in for 'base-distance (and you can add my
vote as well), so I think that settles it. But I still need
people to comment on
1) the patch:
http://codereview.appspot.com/2303044
and
2) the approach:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-10/msg00095.html
Two more
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 07:59:25AM -0700, Mark Polesky wrote:
1) Pardon my ignorance, but do we ever run convert-ly on the
regtests?
I'd consider that as part of 1288.
Cheers,
- Graham
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
On 10/7/10 8:59 AM, Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com wrote:
Enough votes are in for 'base-distance (and you can add my
vote as well), so I think that settles it. But I still need
people to comment on
1) the patch:
http://codereview.appspot.com/2303044
The patch looks fine to me.
I also think the name 'space is misleading; I propose
'default-distance. Opinions?
- Mark
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On 10/6/10 9:46 AM, Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com wrote:
I also think the name 'space is misleading; I propose
'default-distance. Opinions?
So then we'd have, for each item-item-spacing entry
default-distance -- the non-stretched distance between the upper item
reference point and
Mark Polesky wrote Wednesday, October 06, 2010 4:46 PM
I also think the name 'space is misleading; I propose
'default-distance. Opinions?
I'd be happy with that change too.
Mark
Trevor
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
Mark Polesky wrote Monday, October 04, 2010 11:14 PM
Usually when I propose things like this, they're shot down
pretty fast, but here goes anyway.
It took me a while to mentally connect the names of the
vertical spacing variables with their specific domains. For
example, I think it's
67 matches
Mail list logo
