Re: [Denemo-devel] Input Profiles

[Richard Shann]

On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 13:26 +0100, Nils Gey wrote:
> Hello list,
> 
> While I still think the ultimate goal should be one keyboard profile for all 
> users (and developers) we can improve the situation until then.
> 
> I think the current profile names are getting in our way. They are named 
> after a rolemodel but this is misleading.
> You can composer, arrange or do whatever in any profile.
But it is deliberately made more difficult to do a different activity in
the wrong profile. E.G. it is difficult to insert arbitrary LilyPond in
the Simple Profile, because the menu item to do it is not present. In
the Arranger profile it is easy to move to the next movement (shift
arrow) but more difficult to extend a selection. OK, there are wrinkles
here - the "Arranger" profile is more strictly a "Transcriber" profile -
targetted at entering lots of music. A real Arranger might well want to
select and copy bits of music as part of arranging - really this is
composer profile stuff.
>From the poll results we lack a Mouse-user profile; but we don't have to
be the most-used notation program, that doesn't have to be our goal.

>  One user even mistook them as hirachical profiles. "Once you are good enough 
> you go one further".
That's fine, those who don't read what it says will choose the default
which will be enough for their simple needs. If you want to do more than
simple things then you know you have to think and read or try out...
> 
> We should either name them after what they do
What they do is enable people to do Simple work (no reading up the
manual)
or Arranger work (just entering music and printing it off)
or Composer work (entering/removing/changing/moving ....)
or Creating LilyPond files for further tinkering - with those tricky
repeat syntax things etc.
So those are the good names chosen (ok, so Arranger is more Transcriber,
but I am not sure it is so obvious what is meant. And also, the big
feature is MIDI-in user or non-MIDI-in user)
>  (but I can't think of such a word) or give them abstract names. 
> "Simple" "Alpha" and "Beta" would be better names. At least the user gets the 
> correct impression here that "Alpha" and "Beta" are meaningless themselves 
> and there is more in that. Well, maybe not Alpha and Beta since these are 
> release releated words. But I think you get what I mean. 
> 
> Nils
> 
> PS 1) I want to repeat myself again: I think the Classic
Classic is the only profile I have heard someone say they were using. It
is intended to be like the original Denemo interface - if it isn't it
needs fixing, not deleting.
>  and Lilypond profile should be deleted. I checked them completely and they 
> are 100% redundant. Anything that can be done with them can be done with 
> either Arranger or Composer, but better.
But not using the same keystrokes (which is the point of Classic) and
not accessing the \volta 2 style repeats (one of the main things a
LilyPond user would object to about Denemo's output for repeats in the
other modes).
>  Even the current simple profile is far better than Classic. These two are 
> the ones that we don't even actively maintain. Anacrusis is still in there, 
> some keybindings are just mad (Shift+Left/Right to change movement) and come 
> from a time where there was no serious selection work possible.
> After reviewing those two profiles I can say with a clear conscience we do 
> everyone a favour by deleting them.
> 
> PS 2) As soon as possible we should give the user the possibility to change 
> the current commandset in Denemos preferences or in the keybindings dialog, 
??? Load command set does this???

What I think we do need - and perhaps it could replace the .shortcuts
files is a per-profile initialisation. That is, a .scm file that is
executed depending on the profile you have chosen. At present we execute
the system wide denemo.scm and then any user's own
~/.denemo/actions/denemo.scm
But there is no stage between, where the user has done no customization,
but has chosen, say, Simple profile; in this case if we execute, say,
Simple.scm this could arrange for anything useful in that profile - e.g.
arrange to check the score for missing tuplets before printing...
It could also install useful buttons - a Mouse-user profile could
install buttons to change the duration of the note at the cursor etc.
I think this .scm script could install all the shortcuts for the profile
too, which would then mean we would not need the .shortcuts file at all.

Richard


> especially after choosing one. 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Denemo-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/denemo-devel