Re: Suggestion: Keep original breaks

[Urs Liska]

Am 27.11.2013 14:54, schrieb David Kastrup:
> Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > What I actually want is to add that behaviour as an option to
> > Frescobaldi's Layout Control Mode.
> So what?

I know you don't care about usability features involving graphical tools 
such as Frescobaldi, Denemo or whatever. But there _are_ people who 
think that improving usability on that side actually improves LilyPond 
usage itself and may increase its acceptance. And this is _not_ a 
single-user opinion.

> > And it's a no-go to inject arbitrary code into to input files that
> > would either make scores dependent on Frescobaldi or on a separately
> > shipped library.
> It's also a no-go to inject arbitrary code into LilyPond proper that is
> artificially restricted to be only suitable for the shortcuts of a
> single user's workflow.

That's bullshit.
I can see three modes of writing scores with LilyPond: creating from 
scratch, copying from models or generating algorithmically. I'm quite 
sure the last one has only a marginal share, and the other two may be 
more or less balanced. So entering conditional breaks is potentially 
useful for nearly half of LilyPond users. Keeping original breaks is 
more or less relevant, depending on type and complexity of the score, 
but if the commands were available like \break or \slurUp I'm sure 
_many_ people would use them regularly.

And it's not a shortcut but a means to avoid having to choose between 
creating dependency issues or having to repeatedly define basic 
behaviour. That's why one can't say I'm shouting down tag-based solutions.

> Please read LilyPond's documentation about structuring input files and
> try to imagine where such a personal minifeature would fit into the
> documentation.

Of course nowhere because I'm not talking about structuring input files 
but about page layout.
Documentation for my (admittedly mini) feature would painlessly fit in 
4.3.1 ("Line breaking") and 4.3.2 ("Page breaking") of NR.

Urs