Re: Bug on first page of German lilypond website
2014-07-20 21:13 GMT+02:00 James : > On 20/07/14 19:56, Federico Bruni wrote: > > Thanks Markus, I'm putting the translation list in Cc. There are two > > persons who expressed their interest in contributing to the update of > > german manuals and hopefully they are reading this email and will take > care > > of this report also. > > > > Bug squad: given the frequency of reports about translated manuals on > bug@, > > should we say that these should be sent to the translation list? Need to > be > > subscribed to post to lilynet? > > Sure. Why not? > > gmane allows to post on bug-lilypond without being subscribed: http://lilypond.org/bug-reports.html translation list needs a subscription: http://lilypond-translations.3384276.n2.nabble.com/ > Do we just fwd them 'as is'? > > yes, better forget my answer ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: Bug on first page of German lilypond website
On 20/07/14 19:56, Federico Bruni wrote: > Thanks Markus, I'm putting the translation list in Cc. There are two > persons who expressed their interest in contributing to the update of > german manuals and hopefully they are reading this email and will take care > of this report also. > > Bug squad: given the frequency of reports about translated manuals on bug@, > should we say that these should be sent to the translation list? Need to be > subscribed to post to lilynet? Sure. Why not? Do we just fwd them 'as is'? James > On Jul 20, 2014 8:45 PM, "Markus Olbrich" < > markus.olbr...@ims.uni-hannover.de> wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> On the German version of the website there is a mistake in the first >> sentence of the first page (http://www.lilypond.org/index.de.html): >> >> Incorrect is: >> "LilyPond ist ein Notensatzprogramm, dass es sich zum Ziel gemacht hat, >> Notendruck von der bestmöglichen Qualität zu erstellen." >> >> Correct is: >> "LilyPond ist ein Notensatzprogramm, das es sich zum Ziel gemacht hat, >> Notendruck von der bestmöglichen Qualität zu erstellen." >> >> Stylistically even better would be: >> "LilyPond ist ein Notensatzprogramm, das es sich zum Ziel gemacht hat, >> Notendruck in bestmöglicher Qualität zu erstellen." >> >> Kind regards, >> Markus >> >> -- >> Dr.-Ing. Markus Olbrich >> Institute of Microelectronic Systems - EDA >> Leibniz Universität Hannover - http://www.ims.uni-hannover.de >> Phone: +49 511 762-19661 - Fax: +49 511 762-19694 >> >> >> ___ >> bug-lilypond mailing list >> bug-lilypond@gnu.org >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond >> > ___ > bug-lilypond mailing list > bug-lilypond@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: Bug on first page of German lilypond website
Thanks Markus, I'm putting the translation list in Cc. There are two persons who expressed their interest in contributing to the update of german manuals and hopefully they are reading this email and will take care of this report also. Bug squad: given the frequency of reports about translated manuals on bug@, should we say that these should be sent to the translation list? Need to be subscribed to post to lilynet? On Jul 20, 2014 8:45 PM, "Markus Olbrich" < markus.olbr...@ims.uni-hannover.de> wrote: > Hi! > > On the German version of the website there is a mistake in the first > sentence of the first page (http://www.lilypond.org/index.de.html): > > Incorrect is: > "LilyPond ist ein Notensatzprogramm, dass es sich zum Ziel gemacht hat, > Notendruck von der bestmöglichen Qualität zu erstellen." > > Correct is: > "LilyPond ist ein Notensatzprogramm, das es sich zum Ziel gemacht hat, > Notendruck von der bestmöglichen Qualität zu erstellen." > > Stylistically even better would be: > "LilyPond ist ein Notensatzprogramm, das es sich zum Ziel gemacht hat, > Notendruck in bestmöglicher Qualität zu erstellen." > > Kind regards, > Markus > > -- > Dr.-Ing. Markus Olbrich > Institute of Microelectronic Systems - EDA > Leibniz Universität Hannover - http://www.ims.uni-hannover.de > Phone: +49 511 762-19661 - Fax: +49 511 762-19694 > > > ___ > bug-lilypond mailing list > bug-lilypond@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond > ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: Bug on first page of German lilypond website
Markus Olbrich writes: > Hi! > > On the German version of the website there is a mistake in the first > sentence of the first page (http://www.lilypond.org/index.de.html): > > Incorrect is: > "LilyPond ist ein Notensatzprogramm, dass es sich zum Ziel gemacht hat, > Notendruck von der bestmöglichen Qualität zu erstellen." > > Correct is: > "LilyPond ist ein Notensatzprogramm, das es sich zum Ziel gemacht hat, > Notendruck von der bestmöglichen Qualität zu erstellen." > > Stylistically even better would be: > "LilyPond ist ein Notensatzprogramm, das es sich zum Ziel gemacht hat, > Notendruck in bestmöglicher Qualität zu erstellen." Stylistically the anthropomorphism is a groaner. "Ziel des Notensatzprogramms LilyPond ist Notendruck in bestmöglicher Qualität". I am not totally happy with "Ziel", but that's a lot better than what we have I think. -- David Kastrup ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Bug on first page of German lilypond website
Hi! On the German version of the website there is a mistake in the first sentence of the first page (http://www.lilypond.org/index.de.html): Incorrect is: "LilyPond ist ein Notensatzprogramm, dass es sich zum Ziel gemacht hat, Notendruck von der bestmöglichen Qualität zu erstellen." Correct is: "LilyPond ist ein Notensatzprogramm, das es sich zum Ziel gemacht hat, Notendruck von der bestmöglichen Qualität zu erstellen." Stylistically even better would be: "LilyPond ist ein Notensatzprogramm, das es sich zum Ziel gemacht hat, Notendruck in bestmöglicher Qualität zu erstellen." Kind regards, Markus -- Dr.-Ing. Markus Olbrich Institute of Microelectronic Systems - EDA Leibniz Universität Hannover - http://www.ims.uni-hannover.de Phone: +49 511 762-19661 - Fax: +49 511 762-19694 ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: midi2ly produces 8*5, can we do better?
2014-07-19 17:59 GMT+02:00 Francisco Vila : > Yesterday I was messing with a MIDI imported in Rosegarden and edited > a bass segment with the event editor, and one of the first events was > a clef event. Let me look at it again tonight. > > Maybe the clef event was generated by Rosegarden on import? It was, and clef events are not exported back to midi files, not even as text events. Rosegarden events are not MIDI events. Sorry for the noise. -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: binding-offset bug
On 20/07/14 12:13, Karol Majewski wrote: >> It seems to me (from my limited playing about with 2.19.8) that if you >> comment out either/or 'two-sided' or 'binding-offset' then the problem >> 'goes away'. So is this a 'binding-offset' issue or a 'two-sided' issue? > James, note that binding-offset doesn't work at all when two-sided is > disabled. This is from documentation: > > binding-offset - The amount inner-margin is increased to make sure nothing > will be hidden by the binding. If the paper size is modified, this > dimension’s default value is scaled accordingly. Works only with > two-sided set to true. > > Karol > > Thanks - off course that makes sense - although one can still bind single page documents, so technically a 'binding offset' could be valid nomenclature if not really the purpose of the function in LilyPond. However I don't think it is clear if it is the binding offset function that is causing the problem or the two-sided function (bear in mind I am not a LP programmer) but merely pointing out that we have _two_ variables here and without one of them (even if that is invalid) the problem goes away, so the two are interdependent (no?) which was what I was getting at really. Anyway, the tracker is created with your example; so I am sure for those devs, that know how this all works, this will be enough to see what/where the issue could be. James ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: binding-offset bug
> It seems to me (from my limited playing about with 2.19.8) that if you > comment out either/or 'two-sided' or 'binding-offset' then the problem > 'goes away'. So is this a 'binding-offset' issue or a 'two-sided' issue? James, note that binding-offset doesn't work at all when two-sided is disabled. This is from documentation: binding-offset - The amount inner-margin is increased to make sure nothing will be hidden by the binding. If the paper size is modified, this dimension’s default value is scaled accordingly. Works only with two-sided set to true. Karol ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: binding-offset bug
On 19/07/14 23:25, Karol Majewski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it seems that binding-offset size scales accordingly to global-staff-size,
> which of course is a bug:
>
> %%%
>
> \version "2.19.10"
>
> #(set-global-staff-size 20)
>
> \paper {
> top-markup-spacing = #'((basic-distance . 0) (minimum-distance . 0)
> (padding . 0) (stretchability . 0))
> two-sided = ##t
> binding-offset = 2\cm
> }
>
> \bookpart {
> \header {
> poet = \markup { \abs-fontsize #13 "left" }
> composer = \markup { \abs-fontsize #13 "right" }
> }
> \score {
> \new Staff { d'4 }
> }
> }
>
> %%%
>
> Now, change global-staff-size to smaller and you'll notice that inner-margin
> becomes smaller too! However, when binding-offset is disabled, changing
> global-staff-size does not affect inner-margin size.
>
> Best
> --Karol
>
>
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=4019
James
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: binding-offset bug
On 19/07/14 23:25, Karol Majewski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> it seems that binding-offset size scales accordingly to global-staff-size,
> which of course is a bug:
>
> %%%
>
> \version "2.19.10"
>
> #(set-global-staff-size 20)
>
> \paper {
> top-markup-spacing = #'((basic-distance . 0) (minimum-distance . 0)
> (padding . 0) (stretchability . 0))
> two-sided = ##t
> binding-offset = 2\cm
> }
>
> \bookpart {
> \header {
> poet = \markup { \abs-fontsize #13 "left" }
> composer = \markup { \abs-fontsize #13 "right" }
> }
> \score {
> \new Staff { d'4 }
> }
> }
>
> %%%
>
> Now, change global-staff-size to smaller and you'll notice that inner-margin
> becomes smaller too! However, when binding-offset is disabled, changing
> global-staff-size does not affect inner-margin size.
>
> Best
> --Karol
Actually that is not a minimal example.
You don't need the
'top-markup-spacing' line
It seems to me (from my limited playing about with 2.19.8) that if you
comment out either/or 'two-sided' or 'binding-offset' then the problem
'goes away'. So is this a 'binding-offset' issue or a 'two-sided' issue?
regards
James
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
