[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> While specific medieval and renaissance music notational items are
> obvious features for lily (I might want to use them myself some day) I
> don't argue for adding graphic notational features since the scope of
> lilypond, as I recognize it, is clearly 'conventional' music fitting
> into well defined pitch- and duration patterns.
The scope of Lily is whatever we can reasonably implement; currently
this means that there has to be a well-defined rational duration
(otherwise \simultaneous doesn't make much sense), but we have to
relax that anyway in the future, to get better grace-note support.
> > I just don't want to see any suggestions
[..]
> discussion themes concerning lilypond I'll of course have to take note
> of that and then possibly unsubscribe from the list.
[..]
Guys, stop it. This is leading noone anywhere.
On a brighter (and equally off-topic) note: do drop by at the concert
of the Utrechts Wind Ensemble by if you happen to be in Utrecht (The
Netherlands) this Friday! We start at 20:30 in the Maria Minor Church,
Achter Clarenburg 6. We'll perform pieces by Strawinsky, Martland,
Jolivet, Andriessen and Van Manen.
Be happy!
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cs.uu.nl/~hanwen/
_______________________________________________
Gnu-music-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-music-discuss
