|
From: | Flaming Hakama by Elaine |
Subject: | Re: Naming convention brainstorming |
Date: | Mon, 2 Feb 2015 18:16:55 -0800 |
From: Urs Liska <address@hidden>
To: lilypond-user <address@hidden>
Subject: Naming convention brainstorming
Hi all,
for quite some time now I've been using a concept that is very useful,
but finally I'd like to give it an authoritative name to be used in
different places.
I'm talking about the working, thinking and compiling mode when I'm
working on the _content_ of a score and not it's final visual
appearance.
This mode is characterized for example by
- not caring too much about layout
- not caring too much about engraving quality
- being interested in visual feedback about manual interventions
(e.g. coloring annotations or the result of custom functions)
There should be a common configuration option that library
authors can (and are encouraged to) respect in their functions. Say I
have a library function "\crossVoiceTie" that does all the work for me
with a hidden voice etc. Then this should highlight that tie or the
hidden noteheads when that special mode is active.
This approach has proven extremely useful and I'd be happy to promote
this as a more general best-practice.
So what are your feelings about this mode of working *before* finishing
an engraving to publication quality?
When collecting that list I realized that "entry mode" got three "votes"
- while I had already decided to settle on this term. I think this is
the most generic and unbiased way of expressing the idea, although even
this one is not perfect. What would perfectly match the essence would be
"edit mode" - but that is highly ambiguous so it is practically useless.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |