Re: improving LilyPond useability
2013/12/28 Federico Bruni : > 2013/12/28 Janek Warchoł >> >> I don't know what happened to Colin - i thought that he was going to >> start working on this already - but anyway here's the rough >> translation of my "quick start" tutorial: >> >> https://github.com/janek-warchol/warsztat-nutowy/blob/translation/english/uczenie/2%20wprowadzenie%20do%20LilyPonda.ly > > nice > > the download link of frescobaldi should be: > https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/releases updated, thanks! Janek ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
2013/12/28 Janek Warchoł > I don't know what happened to Colin - i thought that he was going to > start working on this already - but anyway here's the rough > translation of my "quick start" tutorial: > > https://github.com/janek-warchol/warsztat-nutowy/blob/translation/english/uczenie/2%20wprowadzenie%20do%20LilyPonda.ly > nice the download link of frescobaldi should be: https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/releases ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
Hi Daniel and Alex, 2013/12/27 Daniel Rosen : > >> >> From: Janek Warchoł [mailto:janek.lilyp...@gmail.com] >> >> I've created a "Quick-start" tutorial some time ago. It's only >> >> 6 pages long and covers nearly all basic notation elements than a >> >> beginner would need - but it's not just a cheat-sheet: it introduces >> >> and teaches how to use Lily. >> >> >> >> I'd be more than happy to share this tutorial and translate it, but i >> >> don't have time to lead an effort to incorporate it in our docs. So, >> >> if someone wants to take responsibility for this, i'll help, but >> >> without support this will not work out! > > Janek, > > I think I'm about ready to take a swing at this. Shall I email you about it > directly, or keep the discussion here on the list? Definitely keep it on the list - as you probably have noticed, i'm much less active because of the internship i have and because i cannot type as much as i'd like, so my responses are likely to be delayed and short. I don't know what happened to Colin - i thought that he was going to start working on this already - but anyway here's the rough translation of my "quick start" tutorial: https://github.com/janek-warchol/warsztat-nutowy/blob/translation/english/uczenie/2%20wprowadzenie%20do%20LilyPonda.ly 2013/12/27 Alex Loomis : > I can proofread the English version. Good! Please coordinate with Daniel. thanks, Janek ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
I can proofread the English version. On Dec 27, 2013, at 4:08 AM, Daniel Rosen wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Janek Warchoł [mailto:janek.lilyp...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 12:58 PM >> To: Daniel Rosen >> Cc: LilyPond Users; Jan Nieuwenhuizen; David Kastrup; Urs Liska; Noeck; >> Kieren MacMillan; Joseph Wakeling; Benjamin CL; Richard Shann >> Subject: Re: improving LilyPond useability >> >> Hi Daniel, >> >> (sorry for delayed reply - so many emails flying around...) >> >> 2013/12/2 Daniel Rosen : >>>> -Original Message- >>>> From: Janek Warchoł [mailto:janek.lilyp...@gmail.com] I've created a >>>> "Quick-start" tutorial some time ago - my choir colleagues used it >>>> when crowd-typesetting "Dixit Dominus". It's only >>>> 6 pages long and covers nearly all basic notation elements than a >>>> beginner would need - but it's not just a cheat-sheet: it introduces >>>> and teaches how to use Lily. Add to that 3 pages explaining how to >>>> write basic structure and we'd have something that gives an easy (but >>>> complete enough) introduction to LilyPond in half an hour (as opposed >>>> to 2 days of reading and heavy thinking for the Learning manual). >>> >>> Sounds awesome. >>> >>>> I'd be more than happy to share this tutorial and translate it, but i >>>> don't have time to lead an effort to incorporate it in our docs. So, >>>> if someone wants to take responsibility for this, i'll help, but >>>> without support this will not work out! >>> >>> I would definitely be willing to help with this, but I’m afraid that >>> my skill set may be too limited to take the lead--in particular, I >>> don't speak any languages well enough to translate them into English >> without resorting to Google. >> >> That's not a problem at all! I would translate my materials to English; as >> for >> translating them back to other languages we have people who'd take care of >> that. What you'd have to do is to turn my materials into proper >> documentation: find a place for it, fix wording (my translation probably >> won't >> be perfect), incorporate comments from other developers, etc. >> >> In other words, i'd be glad to make the translation but i want to be sure >> that >> my work will actually be used, and that someone will shepherd it through our >> contributing process so that it ends up in the official documentation (i >> don't >> have time to this management myself). >> Of course if you run into *any* technichal difficulty (like "how do i add a >> new >> section to the documentation?"), i'll try to help. But i need someone that >> will >> take responsibility for getting it done. >> >> Quite frankly, i think this would be an excellent project to get started in >> contributing to LilyPond. It doesn't require programming expertise or any >> particular knowledge - you just have to put some effort in. >> >> best, >> Janek > > Janek, > > I think I'm about ready to take a swing at this. Shall I email you about it > directly, or keep the discussion here on the list? > > DR > ___ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: improving LilyPond useability
> -Original Message- > From: Janek Warchoł [mailto:janek.lilyp...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 12:58 PM > To: Daniel Rosen > Cc: LilyPond Users; Jan Nieuwenhuizen; David Kastrup; Urs Liska; Noeck; > Kieren MacMillan; Joseph Wakeling; Benjamin CL; Richard Shann > Subject: Re: improving LilyPond useability > > Hi Daniel, > > (sorry for delayed reply - so many emails flying around...) > > 2013/12/2 Daniel Rosen : > >> -Original Message- > >> From: Janek Warchoł [mailto:janek.lilyp...@gmail.com] I've created a > >> "Quick-start" tutorial some time ago - my choir colleagues used it > >> when crowd-typesetting "Dixit Dominus". It's only > >> 6 pages long and covers nearly all basic notation elements than a > >> beginner would need - but it's not just a cheat-sheet: it introduces > >> and teaches how to use Lily. Add to that 3 pages explaining how to > >> write basic structure and we'd have something that gives an easy (but > >> complete enough) introduction to LilyPond in half an hour (as opposed > >> to 2 days of reading and heavy thinking for the Learning manual). > > > > Sounds awesome. > > > >> I'd be more than happy to share this tutorial and translate it, but i > >> don't have time to lead an effort to incorporate it in our docs. So, > >> if someone wants to take responsibility for this, i'll help, but > >> without support this will not work out! > > > > I would definitely be willing to help with this, but I’m afraid that > > my skill set may be too limited to take the lead--in particular, I > > don't speak any languages well enough to translate them into English > without resorting to Google. > > That's not a problem at all! I would translate my materials to English; as > for > translating them back to other languages we have people who'd take care of > that. What you'd have to do is to turn my materials into proper > documentation: find a place for it, fix wording (my translation probably won't > be perfect), incorporate comments from other developers, etc. > > In other words, i'd be glad to make the translation but i want to be sure that > my work will actually be used, and that someone will shepherd it through our > contributing process so that it ends up in the official documentation (i don't > have time to this management myself). > Of course if you run into *any* technichal difficulty (like "how do i add a > new > section to the documentation?"), i'll try to help. But i need someone that > will > take responsibility for getting it done. > > Quite frankly, i think this would be an excellent project to get started in > contributing to LilyPond. It doesn't require programming expertise or any > particular knowledge - you just have to put some effort in. > > best, > Janek Janek, I think I'm about ready to take a swing at this. Shall I email you about it directly, or keep the discussion here on the list? DR ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
Yann writes: > About this, I also like the fact in LaTeX that once I find the package > that does what I want, I can read the associated doc and use it. Most > of the time it is as simple as "load this package, specify options" > and use some new commands if provided. What I mean is that the > procedure is somewhat standard and unified. > > However, I have a question : it has been suggested to use the package > capability to implement new features, that could be merged later on to > the main Lilypond release. If that happens, what is done with the > package ? Does it stays outside Lilypond core as an external package ? > or is it merged inside ? So do we still have to include/usepackage it > ? (just bouncing ideas, it will surely depend on how all this > mechanism is implemented, if this work is done). I think it would make sense not to automatically include every conceivable package. That way, naming conflicts are avoided. Also some packages might provide conflicting functionality. GUILE offers an autoload mechanism that might conceivably be employed. Using this would not help with the naming conflict aspect, but it would make it possible to just import the symbols of a package when it is loaded from the LilyPond source or a user file, and only load the package itself if it is actually used. This could be handy for "house styles" or "document classes" that guarantee the availability of a lot of packages without actually having to load their body unless it is called for. > I came across several projects (Lalily, openlilylib, orchestralily, or > Nicolas Sceaux scores) that seemed to have very nice features (didn't > explore much though, sorry). Would be great if these could somehow > benefit of some standardised package like interface. Of course, the goal would be to have the system flexible enough to let the authors of these systems adapt their systems to using it without too much of a hassle. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
On 12/10/2013 04:41 PM, Yann wrote: Hello everybody :) I agree with this statement of Janek Warchoł, I think a quick start document would be nice. Maybe the user could be redirected to it when first starting Lilypond (either a web page launched in the browser, or a document open) ? Such a document would fall in-between the c d e f g a b c example of Lilypad and the learning manual. Janek has sent me a copy of his Quick Start Manual, and I think that it can very easily be turned into a downloadable resource as well as a target on the website. I don't see it replacing the Learning Manual, but it looks really nice as a sort of Lily for the Impatiens, if I'm not getting too flowery! Janek has covered the basic stuff well, and I think it might stand a little seasoning with links to the other manuals, just sprinkled here and there. The idea, which I haven't discussed with Janek, might be to put it on the website, but because it's self-contained, we can also encourage the adventurous reader to download the file and play with it, to see what the effect of changes might be. As I say, this is a Partly-Baked Idea at the moment, and I'll put up a tracker/patch for review. Actually, and this just occurred to me, we could also make it part of the default install, particularly on Windows, so that verifying the install results in the Quick Start Guide opening. Stay tuned, this could get to be fun! Cheers, Colin -- Celestial navigation is based on the premise that the Earth is the center of the universe. The premise is wrong, but the navigation works. An incorrect model can be a useful tool. - Kelvin Throop III ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
> 2013/12/4 Jacques Menu > My recent experience creating choir scores for the first time, one of > them with difference words a given stanza in a repeated part (see > attachments), makes me think it would help to have off-the-shelf *commented* > samples of some size and complexity, as a complement to the existing snippets. >>Sounds like a good idea. I could add some real-life score examples of my own. >>Where would you place such material? A new manual, or in an existing one? >>Janek Thu, 5 Dec 2013 18:34:53 +0100 This is an excellent suggestion, examples of small ensembles of various genres suitably authorised by the keepers of the runes would be invaluable to the beginner. These should be as free as possible of "tweaks" as these will confuse and de-motivate the uninitiated. It would be nice if the invocations of instructions/tweaks could be intuitive - you cannot really say that for most Lily tweaks at present. Lilypond is very tweakable to produce all manner of complicated scores but this power needs to be either sheilded from the beginner whose musical/computational skills may not be up to it or made much more accesible. These are not meant to be critical comments just the observations of a convert with modest skills. regards Peter Gentry ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
2013/12/5 Noeck : >> There are two possibilities which come to mind: >> - an appendix to LM, which would actually be my *second* choice, or >> - a new "Templates" library, analogous to the Snippets. > > there is a templates folder in the snippet library! > https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets Indeed. Anyway, i think what Jacques Menu proposed was to put some examples of complete, real-life scores. These are not templates; they should be named differently. A "template" is an empty structure without real music (and real-life adjustments). best, Janek ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
Am 05.12.2013 22:39, schrieb Noeck: There are two possibilities which come to mind: - an appendix to LM, which would actually be my *second* choice, or - a new "Templates" library, analogous to the Snippets. there is a templates folder in the snippet library! https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets I copy the current folders in snippets here, so that more people get aware what can be contributed to this library: custom-music-fonts debugging-layout general-tools input-shorthands meta notation-snippets simple-examples specific-solutions stylesheets templates Cheers, Joram There is also an 'editorial-tools' folder not merged to master yet. But I'm not sure if that repository is a useful item to discuss in this context right now. Urs ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
> There are two possibilities which come to mind: > - an appendix to LM, which would actually be my *second* choice, or > - a new "Templates" library, analogous to the Snippets. there is a templates folder in the snippet library! https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets I copy the current folders in snippets here, so that more people get aware what can be contributed to this library: custom-music-fonts debugging-layout general-tools input-shorthands meta notation-snippets simple-examples specific-solutions stylesheets templates Cheers, Joram ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
On 12/05/2013 01:54 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote: 2013/12/5 David Kastrup : Janek Warchoł writes: 2013/12/4 Jacques Menu My recent experience creating choir scores for the first time, one of them with difference words a given stanza in a repeated part (see attachments), makes me think it would help to have off-the-shelf *commented* samples of some size and complexity, as a complement to the existing snippets. Sounds like a good idea. I could add some real-life score examples of my own. Where would you place such material? A new manual, or in an existing one? Documentation/ly-examples? I actually have no idea where those end up, I just sometimes change them when new syntax comes around. Apparently here: http://lilypond.org/examples.html Which means that it's not quite the right place for them. For starters, examples from http://lilypond.org/examples.html are there because they look nice, not necessarily because their lily code is pretty; people are not meant to learn LilyPond from them but rather get impressed by the output. There are two possibilities which come to mind: - an appendix to LM, which would actually be my *second* choice, or - a new "Templates" library, analogous to the Snippets. Cheers, Colin -- I've learned that you shouldn't go through life with a catcher's mitt on both hands. You need to be able to throw something back. -Maya Angelou, poet (1928- ) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
2013/12/5 David Kastrup : > Janek Warchoł writes: > >> 2013/12/4 Jacques Menu >>> My recent experience creating choir scores for the first time, one >>> of them with difference words a given >>> stanza in a repeated part (see attachments), makes me think it would >>> help to have off-the-shelf *commented* >>> samples of some size and complexity, as a complement to the existing >>> snippets. >> >> Sounds like a good idea. I could add some real-life score examples of my >> own. >> Where would you place such material? A new manual, or in an existing one? > > Documentation/ly-examples? > > I actually have no idea where those end up, I just sometimes change them > when new syntax comes around. Apparently here: http://lilypond.org/examples.html Which means that it's not quite the right place for them. For starters, examples from http://lilypond.org/examples.html are there because they look nice, not necessarily because their lily code is pretty; people are not meant to learn LilyPond from them but rather get impressed by the output. best, Janek ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
Janek Warchoł writes: > 2013/12/4 Jacques Menu >> My recent experience creating choir scores for the first time, one >> of them with difference words a given >> stanza in a repeated part (see attachments), makes me think it would >> help to have off-the-shelf *commented* >> samples of some size and complexity, as a complement to the existing >> snippets. > > Sounds like a good idea. I could add some real-life score examples of my own. > Where would you place such material? A new manual, or in an existing one? Documentation/ly-examples? I actually have no idea where those end up, I just sometimes change them when new syntax comes around. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
Hi Daniel, (sorry for delayed reply - so many emails flying around...) 2013/12/2 Daniel Rosen : >> -Original Message- >> From: Janek Warchoł [mailto:janek.lilyp...@gmail.com] >> I've created a "Quick-start" tutorial some time ago - my choir colleagues >> used >> it when crowd-typesetting "Dixit Dominus". It's only >> 6 pages long and covers nearly all basic notation elements than a beginner >> would need - but it's not just a cheat-sheet: it introduces and teaches how >> to >> use Lily. Add to that 3 pages explaining how to write basic structure and >> we'd >> have something that gives an easy (but complete enough) introduction to >> LilyPond in half an hour (as opposed to 2 days of reading and heavy thinking >> for the Learning manual). > > Sounds awesome. > >> I'd be more than happy to share this tutorial and translate it, but i don't >> have >> time to lead an effort to incorporate it in our docs. So, if someone wants >> to >> take responsibility for this, i'll help, but without support this will not >> work >> out! > > I would definitely be willing to help with this, but I’m afraid that my skill > set > may be too limited to take the lead--in particular, I don't speak any > languages > well enough to translate them into English without resorting to Google. That's not a problem at all! I would translate my materials to English; as for translating them back to other languages we have people who'd take care of that. What you'd have to do is to turn my materials into proper documentation: find a place for it, fix wording (my translation probably won't be perfect), incorporate comments from other developers, etc. In other words, i'd be glad to make the translation but i want to be sure that my work will actually be used, and that someone will shepherd it through our contributing process so that it ends up in the official documentation (i don't have time to this management myself). Of course if you run into *any* technichal difficulty (like "how do i add a new section to the documentation?"), i'll try to help. But i need someone that will take responsibility for getting it done. Quite frankly, i think this would be an excellent project to get started in contributing to LilyPond. It doesn't require programming expertise or any particular knowledge - you just have to put some effort in. best, Janek ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
"Janek Warchoł" schrieb: >2013/12/4 Jacques Menu >> My recent experience creating choir scores for the first time, one of >them with difference words a given >> stanza in a repeated part (see attachments), makes me think it would >help to have off-the-shelf *commented* >> samples of some size and complexity, as a complement to the existing >snippets. > >Sounds like a good idea. I could add some real-life score examples of >my own. >Where would you place such material? A new manual, or in an existing >one? > Next to the templates? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
2013/12/4 Jacques Menu > My recent experience creating choir scores for the first time, one of them > with difference words a given > stanza in a repeated part (see attachments), makes me think it would help to > have off-the-shelf *commented* > samples of some size and complexity, as a complement to the existing snippets. Sounds like a good idea. I could add some real-life score examples of my own. Where would you place such material? A new manual, or in an existing one? Janek ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
>> Some criticism has been made about the length of the manual. I started >> with an IBM PS2 (1982) using a non-graphical interface Microsoft >> Word. The manual, if my addled memory is correct was somewhere around >> 300+ pages. > > And cut. > > "Wrangling down that attacking Rottweiler was actually not all that > hard. It boils down to the same grips and holds we used to employ for > killing lions when I was young." :D Yes, those are the people using LP and I am proud of you. But there are many more interested in music engraving with a different history. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
"Mark Stephen Mrotek" writes: > Since my practice and performance of Lilypond spans less than a year > (installed 21 May 2013), I might qualify to comment on the "attractiveness" > and/or "accessibility" of Lilypond to a newbie. > > Preservation of a two-part invention written for an undergraduate course > (1967) in Baroque Music Practice was the impetus to diving into Lilypond > (pardon the pun). The web page offered everything that I needed to start; > basic tutorials, which really go somewhat beyond just basic, and several > text editors. I chose Frescobaldi. A comment was made that the "drag and > drop" instructions for the test leaves one "hanging." Well, that may be true > for someone who does not peruse the tutorials or the manual readily > available on the web site. > > Some criticism has been made about the length of the manual. I started > with an IBM PS2 (1982) using a non-graphical interface Microsoft > Word. The manual, if my addled memory is correct was somewhere around > 300+ pages. And cut. "Wrangling down that attacking Rottweiler was actually not all that hard. It boils down to the same grips and holds we used to employ for killing lions when I was young." I think LilyPond is reasonably sellable to old hands at computing. But they are an endangered species. LilyPond nowadays has to teach people first what being an old hand is like. > My learning process is basically: I want to do this, how do I do this, > where is this in the manual (the "search" provision is very helpful > here), experiment with the command(s) in the score, copy the > successful command onto a cheat sheet with notation. And if you do that with good reference material, systematically and determinedly for a year, you'll be able to read the Iliad in the original. It's a fad nerds indulged in before computers were invented. Where do we get with today's capability of people to focus and work on a given task? Well, at least we are dealing with musicians here. > To date I have transcribed some 25+ piano scores for use on my PC > Slate. The PDF's produced by Lilypond are crisper than other published > or scanned scores. The consistent spacing allows my eyes to track in > the same manner from score to score. Lilypond allows me to make my own > "edition" of the score with personal fingering, dynamics, and > reminders. It also allows me to eliminate editorials with which I do > not agree. Man, the cluttered scores... At baroque time, players were supposed to do their own embellishments and extemporize from figured bass. Nowadays it is too much to ask to figure out your fingerings. Of course, it's particularly annoying for me as a button accordion player playing piano music. But it was already as a violinist playing violin music. > Not having any experience with any other engraver (have recently > dabbled with Demeno), I cannot make comparisons. I do know that from > the start Lilypond may have challenged me. It never frustrated me. Your frustration tolerance has seriously been tampered with in your early years. Perhaps LilyPond should be obligatory school material. Better get the kids into the right frame of mind early. It will help them with more than one thing later in life. Which is basically how Latin is still getting sold as school material, and it is somewhat less applicable to modern life livelihoods. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: improving LilyPond useability
Hello, Since my practice and performance of Lilypond spans less than a year (installed 21 May 2013), I might qualify to comment on the "attractiveness" and/or "accessibility" of Lilypond to a newbie. Preservation of a two-part invention written for an undergraduate course (1967) in Baroque Music Practice was the impetus to diving into Lilypond (pardon the pun). The web page offered everything that I needed to start; basic tutorials, which really go somewhat beyond just basic, and several text editors. I chose Frescobaldi. A comment was made that the "drag and drop" instructions for the test leaves one "hanging." Well, that may be true for someone who does not peruse the tutorials or the manual readily available on the web site. Some criticism has been made about the length of the manual. I started with an IBM PS2 (1982) using a non-graphical interface Microsoft Word. The manual, if my addled memory is correct was somewhere around 300+ pages. Other manuals (Aldus/Adobe PageMaker, PowerPoint, Excel, Windows) were at least the same, or of greater length. I do not read manuals - that would be like reading all of Proust at one sitting. My learning process is basically: I want to do this, how do I do this, where is this in the manual (the "search" provision is very helpful here), experiment with the command(s) in the score, copy the successful command onto a cheat sheet with notation. For those times at which I could not find a solution or I could not make the selected command behave as I wanted, then someone from the Users' Group would guide me. This is an aspect that is not noted or is highly underrated as a plus for Lilypond. Support for other software requires, at best, hunting through a forum or waiting for an e-mail response (usually days) or, at worst, some type of paid support. My requests for help to the group got responses in less than two hours! Although Lilypond is a complex program, it is not a complicated program. As with any complex program, acquisition of all of the "bells and whistles" is not at ones fingertips and requires some time and effort. To date I have transcribed some 25+ piano scores for use on my PC Slate. The PDF's produced by Lilypond are crisper than other published or scanned scores. The consistent spacing allows my eyes to track in the same manner from score to score. Lilypond allows me to make my own "edition" of the score with personal fingering, dynamics, and reminders. It also allows me to eliminate editorials with which I do not agree. Not having any experience with any other engraver (have recently dabbled with Demeno), I cannot make comparisons. I do know that from the start Lilypond may have challenged me. It never frustrated me. Mark Stephen Mrotek -Original Message- From: lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf Of David Kastrup Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 7:16 AM To: Phil Burfitt Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject: Re: improving LilyPond useability "Phil Burfitt" writes: > I believe first impressions are important, and I think that LilyPond > lets itself down here. After installing LilyPond, a new user will > discover a new icon on their desktop. They'll double click on it, and > what do they get?a sort-of read me file (it's LilyPad, but you > wouldn't know that unless you spotted the header/title), and a command > prompt that doesn't work or do anything (many computer users have > never seen or even heard of a command prompt!). Well, we are selling a Porsche engine. So that people can start doing something useful with it right away, it gets delivered built into a dune buggy. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
renato writes:
> Hi, I feel like you misinterpreted what I'm saying. All the things you
> say are good of course: sensible syntax, good "getting started"
> documentation, templates, not exhausting the user. I'm not saying you
> should purposefully make lilypond obscure, just saying that you should
> not encourage people not reading the docs, i.e. hiding complexity.
I come not to hide complexity but to abolish it.
> I feel that many WYSYWIG editors try to make complex things easy, and
> that's usually impossible by definition,
No, it isn't. The definition of "complex" is
>From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 [gcide]:
Complex \Com"plex\ (k[o^]m"pl[e^]ks), a. [L. complexus, p. p. of
complecti to entwine around, comprise; com- + plectere to
twist, akin to plicare to fold. See {Plait}, n.]
1. Composed of two or more parts; composite; not simple; as,
a complex being; a complex idea.
[1913 Webster]
Ideas thus made up of several simple ones put
together, I call complex; such as beauty, gratitude,
a man, an army, the universe. --Locke.
[1913 Webster]
2. Involving many parts; complicated; intricate.
[1913 Webster]
When the actual motions of the heavens are
calculated in the best possible way, the process is
difficult and complex.--Whewell.
[1913 Webster]
{Complex fraction}. See {Fraction}.
{Complex number} (Math.), in the theory of numbers, an
expression of the form a + b[root]-1, when a and b are
ordinary integers.
Syn: See {Intricate}.
[1913 Webster]
The main thing to note here is "involving many parts". The art to
mastering complexity is then to have the complexity of a solution
cleanly decompose into simpler parts, with a large preference to have
this decomposition occur along the same lines that would be used to
break the complexity of the _problem_ into parts.
"Here is some feature/trick which you can use for tackling an actually
dissimilar problem" may save your ass sometimes, but if you save too
many asses, feeding and accommodation may become problematic.
Programmers are a bit like mathematicians at heart: if a problem has a
demonstrable solution, it is no longer interesting and they move on.
Which is bad: a proof of concept is not a substitute for a concept.
> so you end up sacrificing flexibility for the sake of making a good
> impression on users. I would like if lilypond never went down that
> path.
Oh, LilyPond is a dragon anyway. But there is a difference between a
lazy spiteful steed that will only work given no alternatives, and one
that is one with its rider and eager to soar the skies in a union of
minds.
Yes, there will always be a "beware of the dragon" warning to heed. But
in the end, the thing we are aiming for is "enjoy the power of the
dragon and become one with it".
> But that's just my opinion, I'm not a developer nor a professional
> (not even amateur) musical typesetter, so I'll just shup up now :=)
Your opinion is, of course, not wrong as such. But it can benefit from
some seasoning.
--
David Kastrup
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
From: "Renato"
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 11:54 PM
"Phil Burfitt" wrote:
>you don't really get around these programs without reading docs
>(and you shouldn't try to make it easy).
I disagree with "you shouldn't try to make it easy".
what I meant was "you shouldn't try to make it easy to get around
fiddling with the program without reading the docs", i.e. you shouldn't
try to encourage not reading the docs
Ok, I see what you mean. However I think a "carrot" is far better than a
"stick". Give the new user plenty to play with straight off. A read-me file
with usage instructions, a mini tutorial and well chosen examples beyond
just \relative c' { c d e f g a b c } will quickly wet their appetite.
They'll soon be seeking out the docs with enthusiasm, and not begrudgingly.
Phil.
renato
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 10:01:30 +0100 David Kastrup wrote: > Renato writes: > > > On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 18:14:52 - > > "Phil Burfitt" wrote: > > > >> >you don't really get around these programs without reading docs > >> >(and you shouldn't try to make it easy). > >> > >> I disagree with "you shouldn't try to make it easy". > > > > what I meant was "you shouldn't try to make it easy to get around > > fiddling with the program without reading the docs", i.e. you > > shouldn't try to encourage not reading the docs > > Why? I find nothing wrong with things that work as expected as much > as possible. It is not a sign of good design if naive expectations > turn out wrong again and again. The purpose of LilyPond is > typesetting music, not a puzzle game. As it is a language composed > of arbitrary letters on the keyboard, one needs something to start > off, true. An environment with default templates or a sample > document/run-through at least gives the user enough of a clue to know > when he needs to look at more stuff or can try figuring out something > by himself. > > But when he _does_ try figuring out something by himself, then it's > nice if at least some things work out as expected instead of failing > for obscure technical reasons. > > There is no point in exhausting the tolerance levels of the user just > for kicks. Learning stuff must have proportional rewards, or at some > point people stop. > > And that means we need a user experience where you are not stuck for > days in the docs before getting out your first notes. > Hi, I feel like you misinterpreted what I'm saying. All the things you say are good of course: sensible syntax, good "getting started" documentation, templates, not exhausting the user. I'm not saying you should purposefully make lilypond obscure, just saying that you should not encourage people not reading the docs, i.e. hiding complexity. I feel that many WYSYWIG editors try to make complex things easy, and that's usually impossible by definition, so you end up sacrificing flexibility for the sake of making a good impression on users. I would like if lilypond never went down that path. But that's just my opinion, I'm not a developer nor a professional (not even amateur) musical typesetter, so I'll just shup up now :=) cheers, renato signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
Renato writes: > On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 18:14:52 - > "Phil Burfitt" wrote: > >> >you don't really get around these programs without reading docs >> >(and you shouldn't try to make it easy). >> >> I disagree with "you shouldn't try to make it easy". > > what I meant was "you shouldn't try to make it easy to get around > fiddling with the program without reading the docs", i.e. you shouldn't > try to encourage not reading the docs Why? I find nothing wrong with things that work as expected as much as possible. It is not a sign of good design if naive expectations turn out wrong again and again. The purpose of LilyPond is typesetting music, not a puzzle game. As it is a language composed of arbitrary letters on the keyboard, one needs something to start off, true. An environment with default templates or a sample document/run-through at least gives the user enough of a clue to know when he needs to look at more stuff or can try figuring out something by himself. But when he _does_ try figuring out something by himself, then it's nice if at least some things work out as expected instead of failing for obscure technical reasons. There is no point in exhausting the tolerance levels of the user just for kicks. Learning stuff must have proportional rewards, or at some point people stop. And that means we need a user experience where you are not stuck for days in the docs before getting out your first notes. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 18:14:52 - "Phil Burfitt" wrote: > >you don't really get around these programs without reading docs > >(and you shouldn't try to make it easy). > > I disagree with "you shouldn't try to make it easy". what I meant was "you shouldn't try to make it easy to get around fiddling with the program without reading the docs", i.e. you shouldn't try to encourage not reading the docs renato -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSnR3LAAoJEBz6xFdttjrftggIAMvwVeJ0KVumSEazSdshnBSD Iijui2hMr/bCtjGjTh+r8WZjK/8xw4XKA10xW9idGp9hM1KfP/Rn2w9bonUQCLjn f0anxJj9hevfhhtsGzMmvr5L2yJJ15USnSGkgjmhMHx2UcJBQDQ2v2AIopnott22 LpC/Pe8YyYR/ha5yzu+cmCxb81C/oNpLnh4uuGg0KlYhCpaT8QszxQOaiKFsyo+J h4/tNGQYrLdRNG90BDaIVHR8mrAG9F5k18xA9+QB+E40uiB6XiX09yGcyhebtFry aa0NzyAWWb7yhH3BBjeyY6a4pJETfn2egXGBMPZfqHesaeLdgB0qIIyC7dBiYxA= =d1Sz -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Phil Burfitt wrote: > - Original Message - From: "David Kastrup" > Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 7:11 PM > > > Wouldn't it be far better after installing lilypond, to present the >>> user with a cut down tutorial and usage instructions in a read-me >>> file, and two desktop icons/shortcuts...one for this read-me file, and >>> the other for invoking lilypond without arguments, which would then >>> throw out a usage message? >>> >> > > Given that the vast majority of computer users are on windows machines > (for better or worse), I wonder just how many new users (and therefore > potential contributers) confronted with this situation, have _not_ sought > help, and have just given up. > > Phil. > > The thing that has always confused me on LP is that when I install it on a Mac, I get a LilyPond app with an icon that I can click on and open up a LP editor with built-in compiler (at least, this is what the user experiences). In Windows, I don't get the same thing. I think the "Lilypond" vs. "Lilypad" is a user expectation issue. If, as a Windows user, I install Lilypond, I want to open a program called "Lilypond," and I want it to be called "Lilypond." Just like if I go to a website, I'd like the base URL to remain whatever I typed in unless there's a good reason for it. Carl P. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
- Original Message - From: "David Kastrup" Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 7:11 PM Wouldn't it be far better after installing lilypond, to present the user with a cut down tutorial and usage instructions in a read-me file, and two desktop icons/shortcuts...one for this read-me file, and the other for invoking lilypond without arguments, which would then throw out a usage message? Well, I have no idea. I don't use "user-friendly" operating systems. :) But I assume you _do_ want a "user-friendly" lilypond. I was reminded of my own initial surprise on downloading and running lilypond for the first time some years back, by the following email earlier today... http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2013-12/msg00061.html Given that the vast majority of computer users are on windows machines (for better or worse), I wonder just how many new users (and therefore potential contributers) confronted with this situation, have _not_ sought help, and have just given up. Phil. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
"Phil Burfitt" writes: > From: "Renato" > Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 4:49 PM > >> I mean, lilypond is text-editor + command-line by design > > Of course, but what it the point of invoking a command prompt that > _doesn't work_ when clicking on the lilypond icon (the view from a > windows machine), and popping-up lilypad which will possibly confuse > the user who has just downloaded a program called lilypond? > >>you don't really get around these programs without reading docs >>(and you shouldn't try to make it easy). > > I disagree with "you shouldn't try to make it easy". Yup. The whole point with Lilypad was to make the first steps easier. > Wouldn't it be far better after installing lilypond, to present the > user with a cut down tutorial and usage instructions in a read-me > file, and two desktop icons/shortcuts...one for this read-me file, and > the other for invoking lilypond without arguments, which would then > throw out a usage message? Well, I have no idea. I don't use "user-friendly" operating systems. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
- Original Message - From: "Renato" Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 4:49 PM I mean, lilypond is text-editor + command-line by design Of course, but what it the point of invoking a command prompt that _doesn't work_ when clicking on the lilypond icon (the view from a windows machine), and popping-up lilypad which will possibly confuse the user who has just downloaded a program called lilypond? you don't really get around these programs without reading docs (and you shouldn't try to make it easy). I disagree with "you shouldn't try to make it easy". Wouldn't it be far better after installing lilypond, to present the user with a cut down tutorial and usage instructions in a read-me file, and two desktop icons/shortcuts...one for this read-me file, and the other for invoking lilypond without arguments, which would then throw out a usage message? Phil. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: improving LilyPond useability
> -Original Message-
> From: Janek Warchoł [mailto:janek.lilyp...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 8:50 AM
> To: LilyPond Users; Jan Nieuwenhuizen; David Kastrup; Urs Liska; Noeck;
> Kieren MacMillan; Joseph Wakeling; Benjamin CL; Richard Shann
> Subject: improving LilyPond useability (was: Supporting my work on LilyPond
> financially)
>
> Learning Manual is 200 pages. 10 times too long - noone except the most
> nerdy people would read it (no surprise that i'm using Lily - i'm a nerd ;P).
> Even the "Tutorial" part of it is way too long (20 pages just to get the
> program
> running and another 20 pages to get very basic notation!!).
\repeat unfold 300 { +1 }
> I've created a "Quick-start" tutorial some time ago - my choir colleagues used
> it when crowd-typesetting "Dixit Dominus". It's only
> 6 pages long and covers nearly all basic notation elements than a beginner
> would need - but it's not just a cheat-sheet: it introduces and teaches how to
> use Lily. Add to that 3 pages explaining how to write basic structure and
> we'd
> have something that gives an easy (but complete enough) introduction to
> LilyPond in half an hour (as opposed to 2 days of reading and heavy thinking
> for the Learning manual).
Sounds awesome.
> I'd be more than happy to share this tutorial and translate it, but i don't
> have
> time to lead an effort to incorporate it in our docs. So, if someone wants to
> take responsibility for this, i'll help, but without support this will not
> work
> out!
I would definitely be willing to help with this, but I’m afraid that my skill
set may be too limited to take the lead--in particular, I don't speak any
languages well enough to translate them into English without resorting to
Google.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 15:06:13 - "Phil Burfitt" wrote: > So often people after buying a new shiny thingy, open the box, plug > it in, and only after numerous failed attempts to get it to work, > decide to read the manual Well they'd hit the same wall with Latex, it doesn't "do" anything by default, yet still it's the undisputed standard for scientific typesetting. I'd say that lilypond is more or less as good as Latex (which is not perfect, it *is* rather messy at times), the great difference is there is much more interest in Latex so there is excellent documentation and a lot of community activity. Now, one could make the argument that the crowd Lilypond has to appeal to (musicians) is in general far less accostumed to command line programs rather then Latex's crowd (scientist); I'd argue back that Lilypond doesn't really "have to appeal" to someone who doesn't see the advantages of WYSIWYM vs. WYSIWYG and doesn't take the time to learn it. I mean, lilypond is text-editor + command-line by design, you don't really get around these programs without reading docs (and you shouldn't try to make it easy). So I think "improving lilypond's usability" should boil down to: 1) better language functionality (personally I haven't used lilypond all that much so I can't really point out any show-stopper there) 2) better docs and nothing else my 2 cents, cheers renato -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSnLowAAoJEBz6xFdttjrf7EMIAIEuDvT36WaQ8MwA60TqinFK rIngCy9PfVVqVYKS/YgiP3DkV5/GWapEx36HKJkJmZrmYL46Xfs4i0G1Rw+3CqIi 3zOqA8kg4N0iQvrfbuzf7f3GQENN26lFdLVT2RCtm8qMnA+GT9JfzCavXTZPNdvQ 8/PXoAaHE1AAZFcFmTI63+WMHfGGKexLCvlKbLNRCRUojJAKNAjtHg+uXIbDkuRM dzY6oWKPBdkPGn5C2Bvn60MfuolC7/k4EtvvGFNPqeVETYHY+Vzl5LMe86zVuBKX OlH0p9AHxeav21uRPLvkZdNDRjZYk5CyEFz2jwGstax9Dg2nir+waMJzDUtGcOo= =BMq3 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
"Phil Burfitt" writes: > I believe first impressions are important, and I think that LilyPond > lets itself down here. After installing LilyPond, a new user will > discover a new icon on their desktop. They'll double click on it, and > what do they get?a sort-of read me file (it's LilyPad, but you > wouldn't know that unless you spotted the header/title), and a command > prompt that doesn't work or do anything (many computer users have > never seen or even heard of a command prompt!). Well, we are selling a Porsche engine. So that people can start doing something useful with it right away, it gets delivered built into a dune buggy. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: improving LilyPond useability
Hi, I believe first impressions are important, and I think that LilyPond lets itself down here. After installing LilyPond, a new user will discover a new icon on their desktop. They'll double click on it, and what do they get?a sort-of read me file (it's LilyPad, but you wouldn't know that unless you spotted the header/title), and a command prompt that doesn't work or do anything (many computer users have never seen or even heard of a command prompt!). So often people after buying a new shiny thingy, open the box, plug it in, and only after numerous failed attempts to get it to work, decide to read the manual...software users are not that different. If you've invested money you'll soldier on and figure it out, but if it didn't cost you anything, and you're left confused, you'll probably just close it down and move on. My tuppence worth. Phil. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
