Re: promoting LilyPond

[David Kastrup]

Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:

> David Kastrup <address@hidden> schrieb:
>>
>>We need to figure out how we can provide "style sheets", similar to how
>>LaTeX makes it possible to define "document classes" (layout
>>definitions
>>and tools) and "packages" (raw functionality packaged into coherent
>>interfaces).
>>
>>Moving in the direction where this is possible also takes some pressure
>>of stable/unstable development and features/fixes: something which
>>comes
>>in its own, optionally used file is not disruptive to the core
>>stability.
>>
>
> You can imagine that I like this idea ;-)
> Would also make it more straightforward for editors to implement
> functionality based on LilyPond or Scheme code that's not part of
> LilyPond itself.
>
> Is this just a thought or has there already been discussion about this?

I think this has been mentioned a few times as an idea.

-- 
David Kastrup