|
From: | Urs Liska |
Subject: | Opinions requested on deprecating "annotation" commands |
Date: | Sat, 30 Jun 2018 14:14:14 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 |
Hi, as you know I'm working on a number of features around the scholarLY package, and now I'm facing the need to deal with the existing interface. The openLilyLIb module scholarly.annotate provides commands like \criticalRemark, \musicalIssue and a few more that attach an annotation to a score element. Now, while implementing the commands \tagSpan and \editorialMarkup that "tag" some music as a finding or editorial decision I gave them the capability to also create and attach annotations. And since the function interface to \criticalRemark and friends is somewhat clumsy and limited in its capability to addressing the annotated music I would like to make the \tagSpan approach the new standard. I see two options, both with disadvantages:
The second solution would definitely be what I want the package to behave like. Basically the following two statements would then be equivalent:
The problem with this is that it would of course break existing documents. Of course package development is still in a version 0.X state, so breaking changes are definitely not "illegal", but I would actually prefer to get some feedback before going into that direction. I think for most of the cases it would be possible to create a scripted solution to update instances (like convert-ly), but I'm reluctant to make any promises about that: \criticalRemark \with { message = "Hey" } NoteHead c' => \critical Remark \with { message = "Hey" } c' \musicalIssue \with { message = "Hey" } Accidental cis' => \musicalIssue \with { message = "Hey" item = Accidental } cis' but I'm not sure about the other valid syntax options, and not about all the things that could go wrong when comments in the \with block might confuse the parser. Any opinions? Best |
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |