Re: lilypond-user Digest, Vol 125, Issue 97

On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 10:37 AM, Kale Good <address@hidden> wrote:

Hi All,
I'm having a font issue; I'm trying to use Garamond Premier Pro as my serif font (to match my document font for a method book). It won't print the s character. On testing, z printed incorrectly. I switched the font to Adobe Garamond Pro and had similar issues; some characters wouldn't print correctly. Could someone point me in the direction of a fix for this problem?

% Created on Sat Feb 09 15:10:04 EST 2013
\version "2.16.2"
\include "english.ly"

\header {
    title = "a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z fl Th"

}

\score {
    \new TabStaff {
        \relative c' {
            \set TabStaff.minimumFret = #5
            <a,\6>\bar ":|"
        }
    }
}

\paper {
myStaffSize = #20
#(define fonts
    (make-pango-font-tree "Garamond Premier Pro"
                          "Helvetica Neue LT Standard"
                          "Luxi Mono"
                           (/ myStaffSize 20)))
}

On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 7:57 AM, <address@hidden> wrote:

Send lilypond-user mailing list submissions to
address@hidden

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
address@hidden

You can reach the person managing the list at
address@hidden

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of lilypond-user digest..."

Today's Topics:

1. Re:coloring noteheads different depending on parts (takmi ikeda)
2. Re:Scheme education (James Harkins)
3. Re:Scheme education (David Kastrup)
4. Re:Request for feedback on 'lobbying' paper (Colin Hall)
5. Re:Scheme education (Colin Hall)
6. Re:Request for feedback on 'lobbying' paper (David Kastrup)
7. Re:Request for feedback on 'lobbying' paper (Graham Percival)
8. Re:Request for feedback on 'lobbying' paper (Urs Liska)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 10:05:27 +0900
From: takmi ikeda <address@hidden>
To: address@hidden
Subject: Re: coloring noteheads different depending on parts
Message-ID:
<address@hidden>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

oops. Variable name is my silly mistake. I couldn't understand list
structure of scheme, difference between #(a. b) #(a b) . Thank you so
much!

\version "2.16.0"

%%% fixed code

#(define-public ((color-notehead nnn) grob)

(define color-mapping
(vector
(list
(cons (ly:make-pitch 0 0 0) (rgb-color 1 .5 0))
(cons (ly:make-pitch 0 4 0) (rgb-color .3 .7 0))
)
(list
(cons (ly:make-pitch 0 1 0) (rgb-color 1 0 1))
(cons (ly:make-pitch 0 5 0) (rgb-color .5 0 1))
)
)
)

(define (pitch-to-color pitch)
(let*
(
(vvv (vector-ref color-mapping nnn))
(ccc (assoc pitch vvv))
)
(if ccc
(cdr ccc))
)
)

(pitch-to-color
(ly:event-property (event-cause grob) 'pitch))
)

aaa = \relative c' { c8 d e f g a b c }

\score {
<<
\new Staff <<
\override Staff.NoteHead #'color = #(color-notehead 0)
\aaa
>>
\new Staff <<
\override Staff.NoteHead #'color = #(color-notehead 1)
\aaa
>>
>>
}

2013/4/19 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
> takmi ikeda <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> i'd like to change coloring by argument. have you any idea?
>>
>> \version "2.16.0"
>>
>> #(define-public ((color-notehead . nnn) grob)
> (define-public ((color-notehead num) grob)
>
>
>> (vvv (vector-ref color-mapping num)) ;it does not works.
>
> Hardly surprising. Wrong variable name. Even if you were write, the
> define-public used nnn as a rest argument due to the . before it, so any
> number would have gotten wrapped into a list.
>
> --
> David Kastrup
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 01:40:48 +0000 (UTC)
From: James Harkins < address@hidden>
To: address@hidden
Subject: Re: Scheme education
Message-ID: <address@hidden>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Jim Long <lilypond <at> umpquanet.com> writes:

> On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:32:19AM +0200, Urs Liska wrote:
> > Am Freitag, den 19.04.2013, 09:50 +0200 schrieb Stjepan Horvat:
> > That reminds me of my plan to have an issue tracker for my life
>
> The English term for this is, "spouse."

Does this mean I have married org-mode? And if I have, is that marriage
recognized in all 50 states? (When will THAT case come before the Supreme
Court?)

hjh

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 06:15:40 +0200
From: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
To: address@hidden
Subject: Re: Scheme education
Message-ID: <address@hidden>
Content-Type: text/plain

James Harkins < address@hidden> writes:

> Jim Long <lilypond <at> umpquanet.com> writes:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:32:19AM +0200, Urs Liska wrote:
>> > Am Freitag, den 19.04.2013, 09:50 +0200 schrieb Stjepan Horvat:
>> > That reminds me of my plan to have an issue tracker for my life
>>
>> The English term for this is, "spouse."
>
> Does this mean I have married org-mode? And if I have, is that marriage
> recognized in all 50 states? (When will THAT case come before the Supreme
> Court?)

You better read up on "age of consent" and hope nobody notices.

--
David Kastrup

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 11:50:39 +0100
From: Colin Hall <address@hidden>
To: "Urs Liska" <address@hidden>
Cc: Lilypond-User <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: Request for feedback on 'lobbying' paper
Message-ID: <address@hidden>
Content-Type: text/plain

Urs Liska writes:

> Hi,
>
> today I finished the first draft of a paper on a plain text file based
> toolchain for writing (about) music. The target audience are people who
> regularely author such documents but aren't converted yet to 'our'
> approach to authoring.
> The text doesn't provide material to 'getting started' but is intended
> as a mere presentation with the goal of making the target audience
> curious and to give it a try.

Your paper reads well and the presentation is very clear. The appearance
is attractive.

Based on five minutes of reading the paper, Urs, I have a couple of
questions for you.

What is your motivation for writing the document? I can make more
relevant comments if I know your aims.

Can you be more specific about your audience?

To me your paper seems to be pitched very well for someone who is
already interested in these ideas but needs guidance. In other words,
someone who would benefit from this Lilypond library.

I suggest you make a brief, clear statement on the first page of the
problem that is solved by a text-based approach. Speak from the heart,
perhaps drawing on your own experience directly.

Can you avoid having the licencing and credits on the first page? I
found that distracting.

Here is a piece of opinion from me, so you know my position. Users of
WYSIWYG engraving software accept the shortcomings because it is quick
and effective. Users of text-based approaches accept the additional
effort required because they are perfectionists.

Cheers,
Colin.

--
Colin Hall

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 11:53:04 +0100
From: Colin Hall <address@hidden>
To: "David Kastrup" <address@hidden>
Cc: address@hidden
Subject: Re: Scheme education
Message-ID: <address@hidden>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

David Kastrup writes:

> Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Am Freitag, den 19.04.2013, 09:50 +0200 schrieb Stjepan Horvat:
>>> Thanks guys for your anwsers..yes and i want practical
>>> experience..after i write my first lilypond function..
>>> I still don't feel ready..i must learn more..
>>> I am the type of a guy who wants to script everything that is done
>>> more then once..I'd rather if it would be possible script physical
>>> stuff too..
>> That reminds me of my plan to have an issue tracker for my life ;-)
>
> Org mode for Emacs ? Your Life in Plain Text
>
> <URL:http://orgmode.org>

+1

--
Colin Hall

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 13:05:40 +0200
From: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
To: address@hidden
Subject: Re: Request for feedback on 'lobbying' paper
Message-ID: <address@hidden>
Content-Type: text/plain

Colin Hall <address@hidden> writes:

> Here is a piece of opinion from me, so you know my position. Users of
> WYSIWYG engraving software accept the shortcomings because it is quick
> and effective. Users of text-based approaches accept the additional
> effort required because they are perfectionists.

Actually, I tend to use text-based approaches not really because I care
about the perfection of the result, but because it allows me to properly
separate input, tool and output. Things like the accuracy of my mouse
positioning don't figure into the result. Which make the result
actually worse than when working WYSIWYG. But the responsibility for
that lies with the process, it is reproducible, and it will respond to
future improvements of the process.

Old scores of mine keep getting better without me having to invest any
work into any of them. That's hard to beat if they are "good enough" to
start with. And if you are lazy like me, you won't invest much work of
your own beyond "good enough" into any individual score.

--
David Kastrup

------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 12:13:51 +0100
From: Graham Percival <address@hidden>
To: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
Cc: address@hidden
Subject: Re: Request for feedback on 'lobbying' paper
Message-ID: <address@hidden>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 01:05:40PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Colin Hall <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Here is a piece of opinion from me, so you know my position. Users of
> > WYSIWYG engraving software accept the shortcomings because it is quick
> > and effective. Users of text-based approaches accept the additional
> > effort required because they are perfectionists.
>
> Actually, I tend to use text-based approaches not really because I care
> about the perfection of the result, but because it allows me to properly
> separate input, tool and output.

I haven't read the paper, but I'll chime in to say that I prefer
text-based because then I have complete control over my
"documents" (be they text, source code, or sheet music). When
using a GUI tool[1], my hard work is at the mercy of some magical
process which may or may not save the data correctly. If I want
to view my past work, I'm at the mercy of those tools. When I was
a composition student, I found that my fellow students would give
excuses about their scores about once a week ("oh, Finale put a
dotted line over those notes, but I couldn't figure out how to
remove it").

[1] yes, a few GUI tools save data in a human-readable format, but
those are unfortunately rare.

By contrast, using a text-based tool (especially in conjunction
with source control such as git) leaves me in control. If
anything breaks (which it does occasionally), then I can easily
compare the previous (working) input to the current version and
figure how what I did wrong.

- Graham

------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 13:57:16 +0200
From: Urs Liska <address@hidden>
To: Colin Hall <address@hidden>
Cc: Lilypond-User <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: Request for feedback on 'lobbying' paper
Message-ID:
<address@hidden>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Hi Colin,

thanks for your valuable comments!

Am Samstag, den 20.04.2013, 11:50 +0100 schrieb Colin Hall:
> Urs Liska writes:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > today I finished the first draft of a paper on a plain text file based
> > toolchain for writing (about) music.

> ...
>
> Your paper reads well and the presentation is very clear. The appearance
> is attractive.
>
> Based on five minutes of reading the paper, Urs, I have a couple of
> questions for you.
>
> What is your motivation for writing the document? I can make more
> relevant comments if I know your aims.
>
> Can you be more specific about your audience?
This is an important comment because it clearly shows that there is some
work to do.
(Although I assume that with a revision of that first sketch I would
have been able to make my points much clearer anyway).

>
> To me your paper seems to be pitched very well for someone who is
> already interested in these ideas but needs guidance. In other words,
> someone who would benefit from this Lilypond library.
Well, that's not the core of my intention (so there is some work for me
to do).
My target audience are people who are involved in writing scores and
text about music (maybe with a slight personal bias on people who
prepare editions), but who still use word processors and wysiwyg
notation programs.
I want to show them that there's a whole other world with a completely
different approach, and that this text based approach is well worth the
effort it takes to get acquainted with it.

When writing this first draft I didn't (couldn't) focus enough on this
perspective (i.e. developing my arguments for the perspective of
'outsiders'), but mainly wanted to collect the material and bring it to
an order.

So I intended to revise it from that perspective anyway, but I'm glad
about your comment which tells me that this isn't 'optional' at all ;-)

Next week I will have an oral presentation in my university on that
topic. Of course I can only present some percentage of the material in
not more than one hour.
Of course I will use the feedback from this occasion for revising my
text.

>
> I suggest you make a brief, clear statement on the first page of the
> problem that is solved by a text-based approach. Speak from the heart,
> perhaps drawing on your own experience directly.
This is a very good suggestion.

>
> Can you avoid having the licencing and credits on the first page? I
> found that distracting.
This should be possible, I think ;-)
Maybe we'll have to discuss this as there will be quite a lot of
documents based on that documentclass ...

>
> Here is a piece of opinion from me, so you know my position. Users of
> WYSIWYG engraving software accept the shortcomings because it is quick
> and effective. Users of text-based approaches accept the additional
> effort required because they are perfectionists.
This is a good starting point for making a conclusion.
But I'd also include/emphasize the points made by other commentors about
the control it gives.

Best
Urs

>
> Cheers,
> Colin.
>
>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

End of lilypond-user Digest, Vol 125, Issue 97
**********************************************

--
Kale Good: Guitar Instructor
website: phillyguitarlessons.com
email: address@hidden
phone: (215)260-5383
address: 1867 Frankford Ave.
              Philadelphia, PA 19125
Read my article "The Seven Secrets to Six String Success" at GuitarNoise.com: http://www.guitarnoise.com/lesson/seven-secrets-to-six-string-success/
Leading the Journey from No-Skills-Guitarist to Talented Musician!

--
Kale Good: Guitar Instructor
website: phillyguitarlessons.com
email: address@hidden
phone: (215)260-5383
address: 1867 Frankford Ave.
Philadelphia, PA 19125
Read my article "The Seven Secrets to Six String Success" at GuitarNoise.com: http://www.guitarnoise.com/lesson/seven-secrets-to-six-string-success/
Leading the Journey from No-Skills-Guitarist to Talented Musician!

From:	Kale Good
Subject:	Re: lilypond-user Digest, Vol 125, Issue 97
Date:	Sat, 20 Apr 2013 10:49:46 -0400