Hi all, our GSoC student Jeffery has done quite some work on writing a comprehensive LaTeX package to typeset annotations produced from a LilyPond document. I assume he'll soon wrap it up to merge something like a V1.0, but we've started turning to work on the LilyPond side of things already, enhancing the existing state of the ScholarLY package (https://github.com/openlilylib/scholarly).
Right now we're discussing a few things on the interface for defining annotations, and I suggested to extend this discussion to the lilypond-user list. Right now we have a number of annotation *types*, expressed through the commands \musicalIssue, \criticalRemark, \lilypondIssue, \question and \todo. They are used as (e.g.) \criticalRemark \with { author = "Urs Liska" context = "Piano, r.h." message = "Incredibly sophisticated observation" my-arbitrary-prop = "User can use custom properties" } Slur c ( d ) Annotations (can) *refer* to a type of fact in the sources, for example: “pitch”, “rhythm”, ”paper”, ”watermark”, ”erasure”. I think it's natural to express this as an additional property (e.g.) "category": \musicalIssue \with { author = "Urs Liska" context = "lyrics" message = "Should ß be changed to ss here?" category = lyrics-modernization } LyricText Fluß (Instead of a symbol this can also accept a symbol list for multiple categories.) Maybe that's better called "tags"? Finally annotations can refer to the type of editorial action/decision it does. At least for musical issues and critical remarks. The annotation can refer to an editorial addition, deletion or emendation. Here it is currently not clear whether this would warrant a separate property or if it can be understood as a kind of subset of the tags discussed before. But it should be considered in the context of another issue: Annotations can trigger (to-be-implemented) "editorial functions" that apply visible highlighting, for example produce dashing for slurs that have been added by the editor. This could be expressed by a property *apply*: \musicalIssue \with { author = "Urs Liska" context = "violin 1" message = "Slur obviously forgotten in original edition" apply = addition } Slur My question is: is this "application" the same as the type of annotation action from the previous issue? Or could it occur that a project wants to document types of editorial decisions independently from applying visual indications of that? Any feedback appreciated Urs _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user