Re: Standard LilyPond score structure (Was: How do new users feel about LilyPond's documentation?)

[Gilles]

On Wed, 22 Apr 2015 21:53:42 -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> Hi Gilles,
>
> > Yet you long for <some_tool> that would know how to remove a set of
> > bars from "That Production" project. :-P
> > A tool could do that *if* it knew what structure to expect.
>
> I don’t believe that’s necessary… but we can leave that aside for
> now, since the technical investigation required to determine whether
> my intuition is correct isn’t worth it at this stage of the
> discussion.

For sure, it is not necessary: LilyPond itself should be able to do
it since it obviously has to know at some point which part of the
input will end up in which bar.

> > By default, standardization is a Good Thing.
>
> I agree 100%. (But, as an aside, many people wouldn’t!)
>
> > It should not be the case that simple scores have a structure that
> > becomes hugely inadequate when more contents is added.
>
> So, to output a simple 16-bar lead sheet, a user should always [be
> forced to] create 3 files (voice.ily, chords.ily, score.ly)? Or maybe
> four (lyrics.ily)? Or more?
> Because a “one-per-instrument” file structure — or something equally
> segmented in some other way — is likely necessary (or at least
> desirable enough to be chosen as the standard) for a huge project 
> like
> an opera.

Yes! :-)
But once there is a standard, many tools will blossom, in particular
one that would offer "simple layout" and transparently transform into
"standard layout"...
Or more probably a user that is too lazy to set up one directory 
(rather
than one file) for a given project is likely to use a GUI in the first
place and will never ever see the multi-file standard layout.

Regards,
Gilles

> Best regards,
> Kieren.