David Rogers wrote:
The correct answer is (I believe) exactly as you proposed earlier. Talking about Lilypond's internal logic is IMHO counterproductive. In fact, internally, I suspect Lilypond should stay the same - it just needs to allow the user to use it effectively by making (or even just *allowing*) the logical separation between paper, headers, and music, which you already outlined.
It would be great if we could also leave the current mechanism in place if we do such a change. The system made sense to me from the beginning and I'd prefer to think in terms of scope (I have a strong programming background). I don't oppose a division on its merits, but it would be nice if the format would stay the same.
Cheers, Bryan... _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
