On 01/01/17 23:34, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:
>
> Am 2017-01-01 um 21:07 schrieb Wols Lists :
>
>> On 01/01/17 19:56, Urs Liska wrote:
I think that has changed years ago already, but the last time I looked,
> Oolilypond did not make any use of it.
>>
>>> Oh,
Am 2017-01-01 um 21:07 schrieb Wols Lists :
> On 01/01/17 19:56, Urs Liska wrote:
>>> I think that has changed years ago already, but the last time I looked,
Oolilypond did not make any use of it.
>
>> Oh, then it would definitely be worth looking into again.
On 01/01/17 19:56, Urs Liska wrote:
>> I think that has changed years ago already, but the last time I looked,
>> >Oolilypond did not make any use of it.
> Oh, then it would definitely be worth looking into again. Being able to
> maintain vector quality examples in a word processor like this
Am 1. Januar 2017 20:49:50 MEZ, schrieb David Kastrup :
>Urs Liska writes:
>
>> Am 31. Dezember 2016 08:50:51 MEZ, schrieb Noeck
>:
>>>Hi,
>>>
IIRC it is officially unmaintained.
Quite a pity ...
>>>
>>>If there is interest in
Urs Liska writes:
> Am 31. Dezember 2016 08:50:51 MEZ, schrieb Noeck :
>>Hi,
>>
>>> IIRC it is officially unmaintained.
>>> Quite a pity ...
>>
>>If there is interest in maintaining it, I think the original author
>>would agree to do so.
>
> I think
Am 31. Dezember 2016 08:50:51 MEZ, schrieb Noeck :
>Hi,
>
>> IIRC it is officially unmaintained.
>> Quite a pity ...
>
>If there is interest in maintaining it, I think the original author
>would agree to do so.
I think so too. IIRC it was just the usual lack of time.
>
Hi,
> IIRC it is officially unmaintained.
> Quite a pity ...
If there is interest in maintaining it, I think the original author
would agree to do so. I don't remember if there is a license with it,
but I can dig out the conversation with the author next week.
IIUC, the extension is just a
Hi,
sorry, I answered to both mails, but directly instead of addressing the
list.
Case closed, it worked for me.
Thank you. :-)
UCas
Am 01.01.2017 um 00:45 schrieb H. S. Teoh:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 01:12:21AM +0100, UCas wrote:
> [...]
>> For scores with more than 3 or 4 instruments I
Thanks guys,
I knew there was a way to fool the system. ;) I think I'll go for David's
approach. That way I don't need to mess with the music.
I must also check if I can use the \nbsp to get rid of some pesky warnings
with other extenders, which I have ended with "" to stop them extending
over