summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/Documentation/automated-engraving/index.itexi
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorJan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org>2009-08-12 23:38:28 +0200
committerJan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org>2009-08-13 01:30:27 +0200
commit480e203052571809f1a11ee7c7728f08aa042fe9 (patch)
treec56af9445286eb71c8b92b63cc052f3fc8c472a4 /Documentation/automated-engraving/index.itexi
parent6881f8675f87ab0830dbccfaeeab30207552317d (diff)
Doc: Add converted essay.
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/automated-engraving/index.itexi')
-rw-r--r--Documentation/automated-engraving/index.itexi121
1 files changed, 121 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/automated-engraving/index.itexi b/Documentation/automated-engraving/index.itexi
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..4377f0b60d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/automated-engraving/index.itexi
@@ -0,0 +1,121 @@
+\input texinfo @c -*- coding: utf-8; mode: texinfo; -*-
+@ignore
+ Translation of GIT committish: FILL-IN-HEAD-COMMITTISH
+
+ When revising a translation, copy the HEAD committish of the
+ version that you are working on. See TRANSLATION for details.
+@end ignore
+
+@ignore
+hmm, the one big page is too big, but it was really inviting to
+ read. this is not. maybe just scrap this menu and introduction
+ to index?
+@end ignore
+
+@chapheading @qq{Obsessed with putting ink on paper}
+@node index
+
+@unnumberedsec What is behind LilyPond?
+
+
+@image{pictures/hader-collage,,,.jpeg}
+
+
+
+LilyPond is not unique in making music notation: there are a lot of
+programs that print music, and nowadays most of the newly printed
+music is made with computers. Unfortunately, that also shows: just
+ask any musician that plays classical music: new scores do not look as
+nice as old ones.
+
+What is the difference between hand-work and machine work, and what
+ has caused it? How can we improve the situation? This essay explains
+ problems in music notation (software), and our approach to solving
+ them.
+
+@menu
+
+@itemize
+ @item
+
+ @ref{introduction.html,Introduction}: what's wrong with
+ computer music notation.
+
+
+ @item
+
+ @ref{software.html,What's wrong with software}, or how
+ Finale is not the end-all of music software.
+
+
+ @item
+
+ @ref{problem-statement.html,How not to design software},
+ or: modeling music notation.
+
+
+ @item
+
+ @ref{divide-and-conquer.html,Divide and conqueror},
+ A blue print for automated notation.
+
+
+ @item
+
+ @ref{implementing-notation.html,Impressive, but does it also
+ work in theory}? A practical approach to capturing notation.
+
+ @item
+
+ @ref{engraving.html,Music engraving}, the art of printing
+ music.
+
+
+
+ @item
+
+ @ref{implementing-typography.html,Implementing typography}:
+ hackers attack the engraving problem.
+
+
+ @item
+
+ @ref{formatting-architecture.html,A flexible program
+ architecture} lets us write engraving software
+
+
+ @item
+
+ @ref{scoring-esthetics.html,Beautiful numbers}: how
+ LilyPond participates in the Miss World contests.
+
+
+ @item
+
+ @ref{benchmarking.html,Notation benchmarking}: is a flexible
+ architecture enough?
+
+
+ @item
+
+ @ref{typography-features.html,Typographical features} unique
+ to LilyPond.
+
+
+ @item
+
+ @ref{input-format.html,Input format}: how to enter music.
+
+
+ @item
+
+ @ref{conclusion.html,Conclusion}
+
+
+@end itemize
+
+This essay is also available in @ref{big-page.html,one big
+ page}.
+
+@bye
+