Re: lay out

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
22 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lay out

Mats Bengtsson-6


Aaron Mehl wrote:
> Ok I am now getting both unconfused and confused.
>
>
> But both paper and layout deal with layout.

Up to version 2.2, page layout and score layout was all
lumped together into \paper{...}. Now, there's more
structure to it. The intuitive notion is that \paper{...}
only deals with the page sizes, margins, and other page
layout issues that apply to the full book, whereas
\layout{...} deals with the layout within each \score{...}.



>
> I see that structure  in lilypond is not a
> documentation structure. ie a programmers structure.
>
>
> If I were to build a document I would have formatting
> for the page or the entire document and formatting for
> the section.
>
> My  confusion is that lilypond leave the creation of
> sections etc to the user in a way.
>
> The logic is not one of nesting I gather but how
> things are processed, as in python where each part is
> processed going down the page and inner brackets are
> done in a certain order.
>
> I could then have I gather
>
> layout anywhere in a document.
> I would hate to hazard a guess that paper could also
> appear anywhere?
>
> What happens is that the terms become unclear and the
> usage blurry.

I agree completely that this is unclear and have requested
clarifications a number of times.

    /Mats


_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Separation of content and lay out [WAS]: lay out

Donald Axel
In reply to this post by Mats Bengtsson-6
On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 12:46:27 +0200
Mats wrote:

>
> I would claim that this idea clearly has influenced the design
> of LilyPond from the first version. You can set parameters to
> determine the layout in the \layout{...} block.
> However, there will always be special cases where the automatic
> layout decisions taken by the program will not be good enough,
> so therefore we can never get rid of the need to tweak certain
> parameters at a specific place in the score. This means that
> it will be impossible to get a 100% separation of content and
> layout.

I agree and I accept that printed music is a compromise between
lots of different principles with readability at highest priority.

It can be argued that contents cannot and should not be separated
from layout, but as all extremes this opposite point of view is
also misleading.

Which is why Lilypond works well even if there are lots of details
to be mastered when one wants to write orchestral scores (and
voices for the instruments with captions, lead-ins or cue-notes
etc.)

The intelligent nesting of "tweaks" is very promising.


/Donald Axel
--
dax2-tele2adsl:dk -- http://d-axel.dk/  Donald Axel


_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
12