On 02/14/2013 05:32 PM, Urs Liska wrote:
Maybe I'll get in touch with you before. I already intended to present the outline of the presentation here and ask for feedback - I think it's an issue that concerns many of us ... (The presentation is due at the end of April, so it will be some time still).
That'd be great. There's a paper I'm working on right now (not oriented towards music) which I'll try and share with you when it's done -- might be useful despite its different orientation.
From the discussion on this list I assume that there are two very different 'stages' to this. One is the raw musical content, which seems to be quite easily converted (I think something like an XSLT-like transformation of LilyPond's music stream). If one wants to also export LilyPond's layout qualities it would be much more intricate because at the time LilyPond makes its layout decisions that music stream isn't available anymore.
What I was thinking of was e.g. how well the conversion process would preserve articulations, ornaments, etc. Some layout aspects here have "raw musical content" value, e.g. think of a turn that is placed on the second half of a note.
Preparing a "manuscript" with LilyPond isn't the way to go because nowadays many (most) publishers won't pay engraving staff when they also can get editors doing that work for free. (This actually is the reason I didn't get a contract for editing a few works for UE).
True with composers too, I think. I remember about 14 years back a friend told me that his publisher had got in touch with him and said, "OK, we're going to buy you a copy of Finale. The quid pro quo is that now you do all your own score preparation."
Then again, when you go to many 20th-century works, the score is often just a facsimile of the composer's fair copy.
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
