|
In June I published a road map and claimed the list was plumbing, every line of it. It was. Networking, certificates, session persistence, collaboration state, window geometry: nothing on that list would ever appear on a page, and the whole argument for doing it then was that none of it would be sharing the desk when the page finally arrived. That list is nearly spent, and what replaces it is a different kind of work: Where things stand Everything about a piece except the music itself can now be manipulated from the interface. That reads like a summary. It's actually a precise statement, and it names a boundary the architecture drew long before this summer. Changes to the things that contain the music – musicians, instruments, staves, layouts, and a piece's own settings – announce themselves structurally the instant they happen, on every connected client. Changes to the music itself defer to the formatting pipeline, which is asynchronous and which doesn't yet exist. One side of that line is now complete, all the way up to the interface. The other is a routing-table entry with no producer and no consumer. The summer went into the first side. Pieces open and save and close and reopen where you left them. Musicians and instruments are created, numbered, renamed, cloned, reordered and deleted by gesture, with the numbering falling out of the gesture rather than out of a dialog. Layouts assemble into scores and parts. A piece's settings live in a window of its own. A field refuses a value it cannot take, in the field you typed it into, in your own language. Every one of those acts is a single transaction, a single event, a single refetch, a single named step in the Edit menu, and the path is identical whether you are working alone or someone on another continent is working beside you. The semantic model, in other words, finally has a surface. For two years it existed and could only be reached through tests. It can now be reached with a mouse. Except for the music. Which is what the rest of the tickets are for: Finishing what collaboration started
The distributed machinery is proven. Two Oolois on two laptops, one hosting, one connected, editing shared state with undo reaching across the wire and respecting each other's work. What's missing is everything that governs who may do what: invitations, single-use tokens, deep links, JWT identity, role-based access, a host-side collaborator registry, and a piece picker that shows a guest their own slice of a catalogue rather than someone else's filesystem. There's an obvious objection to doing this now. Collaboration is the exception. I fully expect the overwhelming majority of Ooloi users to run it standalone on one machine and never invite anybody to anything. Why finish the exception before the rule? Precisely because it is the exception. Work that sits half-done at the edge of a system does not stay quiet. It surfaces as a special case in every subsequent decision, and it surfaces at the worst moment, which is when you're concentrating on something else. Finishing it now means never thinking about it again. When the engraving work begins, the access model will be behind me rather than beside me, and single-user operation will be what it already is architecturally: a collaboration group whose size happens to be 1. A word about #229, because its title invites exactly the wrong inference. The standalone server isn't a second product. Not a separate edition, not a server variant, not a codebase carrying features the desktop application lacks. It's the backend half of ordinary Ooloi – the same backend, the same components, the same behaviour – packaged to run on its own: in the cloud, on a conservatory's machine, on a collaborator's laptop in another city. There's no new functionality involved. The administrator connects to it as a client, through the same authentication path as anyone else, which is the whole reason it comes after #136 rather than before. The substrate
Ooloi 'eats its own soup'. The formatters that draw a page are plugins, on exactly the same terms as anything a third party might write: the same API, the same performance, the same access. There's no privileged internal path that the public one imitates. This is not a gesture towards openness; it's the mechanism by which engraving conventions stay arguable. If you disagree with how Ooloi slopes a beam or hangs a secondary, and the settings provided aren't enough or your formatting philosophy is different, you can replace the formatter, in whichever JVM language you prefer, and Ooloi doesn't notice the difference. Which is why the plugin layer precedes the drawing. It also precedes MusicXML, because the importer is itself a plugin, and it'll be the first serious test of whether the plugin surface is genuinely sufficient rather than merely declared to be. Skija brings Skia into Ooloi: the graphics engine behind Chrome, Android and Flutter, and the third incarnation of a lineage that runs back through AlphaMask to QuickDraw GX, which is where Igor Engraver began. I have written about that circle before. What matters here is narrower. Until Skija is in, Ooloi cannot draw anything at all. Not a stave, not a notehead, not the small music example that ought to sit inside a preferences dialog showing you what a setting actually does to the page. The layout windows currently open onto a considered and entirely empty surface. Skija is what fills them. The page, assembled
The full specification is in ADR-0028 and I will not rehearse it here. What's worth stating is the order of implementation, because it reads rather like a page assembling itself: First blank pages. Then the text on them: titles, headers, footers, page numbers. Then systems, with their instrument names, brackets and braces. Then staves and their staff lines. Then the measures on those staves, which is where noteheads, stems, flags, dots and accidentals first appear. And spanners last. Ties, slurs, hairpins, lyrics, ottavas, and above all beams, which are the hardest of them and the most revealing of a system's quality. That sequence isn't an implementation convenience. It's the pipeline's own structure: everything that can be computed independently, computed first and in parallel, and everything that depends on final positions deferred until those positions are fixed. The page is built the way the architecture says a page is built. The TurnHere is what actually changes, and it's not the subject matter. For two years an argument could be settled by running something. Does the traversal allocate? Measure it. Does the accidental algorithm handle a grace note at a barline under a hierarchical key override? There is a test, and it either passes or it doesn't. Determinism is a property you can demonstrate. When I wrote that two supposedly intractable problems had collapsed into ordinary algorithms, the claim was checkable, and anyone who doubted it could check it. Nothing in the next phase works that way. No test will tell me a beam slope is beautiful. No suite will fail because a slur's curvature is slightly graceless, or because the white space on a page reads as mean rather than generous. The machinery that has caught every error for two years is about to fall silent on precisely the questions that matter most, and the only instrument left is a musician's eye. Mine first. Then, with any luck, other people's. And the ground underfoot isn't solid in the way the engine's was. Staff notation is roughly a thousand years old. Printed engraving as a craft is five hundred. The copperplate house styles I'm actually implementing are perhaps two hundred and fifty. Each layer left conventions behind. They don't agree with one another, and they don't always agree with themselves: Ross devotes some fifty pages to beaming and contradicts himself more than once within them, and where Ross and Gould differ, they differ because the profession differs. Bärenreiter is not Durand. Neither is wrong. So the design consequence was settled in advance. Engraving rules live as editable data rather than as conditionals buried in source. House styles are configuration. Formatters are replaceable. Where taste genuinely differs, Ooloi takes a position and makes the position adjustable, because the alternative is to pretend a live craft is a solved one. That's the work now: the objective machinery in service of something irreducibly subjective. It's the part I have been waiting two years for, and it's also the part where merely being right is no longer sufficient. TempoA practical note. I've just begun a new client placement, with a complex system to get into production, and it's absorbing a great deal of attention. On top of that my AWS DevOps Professional certification is due for renewal, and I take the AWS exams seriously enough to actually study for them rather than turn up and hope. The next month or so will therefore be slower here than the last three have been. This does not worry me in the slightest. The summer's pace was fast and, if anything, accelerating: subsystem after subsystem closed and stopped asking to be thought about again. The project's in a good place. A quiet month against that background is a quiet month, not a stall. CodaThe anxiety inverts here, which I hadn't quite anticipated.
Invisible work fails by remaining invisible. You solve something genuinely difficult and it vanishes into infrastructure, and the better you have done it the less anyone can see. I have written about that loneliness before. Visible work fails by being looked at. Every judgement I make about a beam, a slur, a page, will be in front of musicians who have spent their lives reading engraved music and who will know immediately, and without being able to say why, whether it's right. I'd rather have that problem. It is, after all, the one I set out to have.
7 Comments
Spring has finally arrived in Stockholm. I mention it only because there's a quality of north European light returning after winter that genuinely affects how work feels. The past two weeks have been quiet on the Ooloi front, code-wise. I'm being onboarded into a large AWS project at work, where my decisions will eventually affect roughly five thousand developers, and onboarding at that scale absorbs a great deal of attention. What Ooloi work I've done has been architectural cleanup: the sort of small consolidations you make when the ground is about to be built on. Data field validation refactored to be entirely general, for instance. Not glamorous, but the kind of work that matters once it has disappeared from notice. Ross also arrived this week. The 1987 third edition, posted from Melbourne in a padded envelope, in pristine condition, and now on the desk where it belongs. Two weeks ago I wrote that I needed the book and couldn't buy it. The void was listening, as the coda noted. It is one thing to write that, and another to hold the consequences. The book is dense and beautifully exact where it counts. It's also, in places, at odds with itself, which is the honest record of any craft this old. The beaming section alone runs to fifty pages and doesn't entirely agree across them; the accidental positioning sections give horizontal spacings down to fractions of a stave space. Exactly what I'd hoped for. Translating it into data and code will be a pleasure. What strikes me paging through is how much of the material I already know in some sense. Musicians absorb this kind of thing through a lifetime of reading and writing scores. The interest is not the content as content; it's the formalisation. Ross surfaces principles that intuition alone never quite articulates. He's rigorous about things most musicians never have to put into words, and that's where the real value sits. It's also what makes the book usable as a specification rather than as commentary.
The road ahead, briefly. The Piece Window comes first, multi-user collaboration aware from the start, built on the patterns the Instrument Library established. After that: frontend session persistence so windows reappear where you left them; the Piece Preferences window (also collaboration aware); clock skew compensation for reliable distributed undo and redo; and the full multi-mode client work, with Google-Docs-style permission management for connecting peers. That last item closes a chapter. Once it's done, I won't have to think about multi-user logic again. It'll simply be there. Then plugins for all JVM languages, a first version of MusicXML import and export, and Skia/Skija with GPU acceleration. The last of those is when SMuFL fonts can finally be drawn on the page. After which the rendering pipeline proper begins. The first stage draws everything except the music: page numbers, titles, headers, footers, staves, system barlines, braces, brackets, instrument names. Crucially, it's done through the plugin system itself, in Clojure plugins. If you don't like the choices, you can replace them, in whatever JVM language suits. I'm not sure it'll ever be necessary, but it can be done if so desired. Then the interesting material: noteheads, horizontal spacing, flags, augmentation dots, multi-voice collision resolution, accidental clustering, unisons. Everything that isn't a spanner. The solver gets the supposedly easy work first. Spanners last: beams, ties, slurs, hairpins, glissandi, lyrics, pedalling, 8vas. Where Magnus's question about hovering secondary beams will finally have somewhere proper to live. But first: piece windows. Expect GIFs/videos soon! I've published a guide to Ooloi's frontend architecture – long, precise, and detailed, written for architects and developers who want to understand the system from the inside.
It covers window lifecycle, event architecture, the rendering pipeline, fetch coordination, localisation, collaboration, and the testing model. Together with the Timewalking Guide and the Polymorphic API Guide, it forms the main conceptual gateway into Ooloi's internals. Worth flagging for experienced frontend developers: this architecture inverts several instincts. The frontend holds no semantic authority. It is computationally strong and structurally subordinate; that subordination is precisely what makes distributed collaboration, transport independence, and first-class plugin composition possible without architectural compromise. The guide explains why. I think the argument is sound, though I'm aware it might feel distinctly odd, or even regressive, to a developer whose instincts were formed in React or a similar ecosystem. If you work in notation – as a musician, engraver, or editor – and find this kind of writing opaque, current large language models are genuinely useful here. Feed the guide to one and ask what it means for your daily work. It's a reasonable use of the technology, and the answers tend to be surprisingly good – when they're not inventing things I'd never claim ;) Worth stating plainly: the subject here is art, and the technical rigour exists in service of that, not despite it. This blog documents the reasoning behind Ooloi as it develops – for future contributors, researchers, maintainers, and critics. Systems like this have a lineage and a psychological architecture as much as a technical one. I want that visible. This blog has a voice because it was written by someone who considers authorial invisibility a failure mode rather than a virtue. We have a new year, and it's time to make plans. Ooloi's architecture is now closed, and the work enters a new phase. What follows is a road map, not a schedule – no dates, no promises – but a logical progression. These stages are different in nature from what has gone before. Conceptually simpler than the deep semantic work (what the music is, how it's represented and manipulated) or the infrastructure (server/client transports and roundtrips, monitoring, certificates). Everything below is comprehensively architectured and implementation-ready. The thinking is done; what remains is execution. The PreparationsEvent-Driven Client Architecture: The nervous system that lets the interface respond without freezing. (ADR-0022, ADR-0031)
Windowing System: Windows, menus, palettes, dialogs, notifications, connection status. The application becomes something you can see and touch. (ADR-0005, ADR-0038) Multi-Mode Clients: Standalone operation, peer-to-peer connection, shared server connections. (ADR-0036) Skija / GPU Rendering: The drawing substrate. GPU-accelerated graphics, paintlist caching, lazy fetching. The machinery for putting marks on screen. (ADR-0005, ADR-0038) Hierarchical Rendering Pipeline: The transformation from musical structure to visual layout. (ADR-0028, ADR-0037) Plugin System: First-class access from any JVM language. (ADR-0003, ADR-0028) MusicXML: The first, limited version, implemented as a canonical plugin. Real scores entering the system. (ADR-0030) And then – and only then – will the first staff line appear. When I began coding Igor Engraver around 1995, the choice of platform was straightforward. Macs were where creativity lived. Windows – clumsy, unintuitive, user-hostile – was for accountants and management consultants. I needed to escape Finale's stranglehold, and I needed the best possible foundation for professional music engraving. That foundation was QuickDraw GX. Apple had released something genuinely remarkable: a complete 2D graphics and typography system with sophisticated font handling, Bézier curve operations, transformation matrices, and sub-pixel anti-aliased rendering. For music notation – which is essentially complex typography with thousands of precisely positioned curves – GX was perfect. Not adequate, not sufficient: perfect. Igor Engraver was built on QuickDraw GX from the beginning. Mac-only, by choice and by necessity. Windows didn't matter. We founded NoteHeads, shipped the software, and believed we'd eventually need to address cross-platform support. But that was a distant concern. Apple Pulls the Rug Then Apple announced that Mac OS X would not include QuickDraw GX. The technological bedrock simply disappeared. Everything Igor depended upon – the font handling, the curve rendering, the transformation system – would not exist in the next operating system. We weren't just facing a port; we needed to find something equivalent to GX's capabilities whilst making Igor work on both Mac and Windows. In 1999 and 2000, that combination was extraordinarily rare. Most graphics libraries offered either good typography or good 2D graphics, rarely both. Cross-platform support usually meant compromising on quality. We needed the full GX feature set: anti-aliased Bézier curves, sophisticated font rendering, transformation matrices, professional typography. And we needed it to work identically on Mac and Windows. I searched. Found something. Used it for the Windows port and the post-GX Mac version. And then, over the following decades, the name simply slipped away into that particular fog where technical details go when you've moved on to other problems. Twenty-Five Years Later In 2025, building Ooloi, I wanted to document Igor's history properly. But I couldn't remember the name of the library we'd used to replace QuickDraw GX. I could describe it – commercial, cross-platform, sophisticated 2D graphics, professional typography – but the name was gone. So I did what one does in 2025: I asked Claude to search the web archives. The answer came back: AlphaMask Graphics Library. And then I read who had founded the company. The Lineage Revealed AlphaMask Inc. was founded in 1999 by Mike Reed and Oliver Steele. Reed had been the tech lead on Apple's TrueType and font system. Steele had been on the QuickDraw GX development team and had led the Apple Dylan project at Apple Cambridge – the former Coral Software, where Macintosh Common Lisp originated. The people who built QuickDraw GX had left Apple and founded a company to continue that work. When Apple made what I considered a profound mistake in abandoning GX for OS X, the GX team apparently agreed – to the point of leaving Apple entirely to focus on their superior graphics engine. Whether I knew about Steele's Lisp background when we chose AlphaMask, I honestly cannot recall. I like to think the choice was purely on merit: AlphaMask offered GX-level capabilities in a more decoupled, portable form. It did what we needed. The fact that someone who understood both graphics and Lisp had designed the API might explain why it integrated so cleanly with our Lisp codebase, but that may simply be a pleasant historical detail rather than a decision factor. Either way, when QuickDraw GX disappeared, I had unknowingly followed the people whose work I trusted. The Pattern Continues Years later, when designing Ooloi, I chose Skia as the graphics foundation. Modern, open-source, GPU-accelerated, excellent typography, sophisticated path operations, cross-platform. I chose it on technical merit, comparing it against alternatives and finding it superior. I had no idea that Skia was founded by Mike Reed and Cary Clark – another QuickDraw GX team member – a few years after AlphaMask. Or that Google had acquired Skia in 2005 and made it the graphics engine for Chrome, Android, and Flutter. Or that billions of devices now use Skia for their rendering. Or that the internal name at Apple for Quickdraw GX was - Skia. QuickDraw GX has had three incarnations: first as itself, then as AlphaMask, then as Skia. The same design philosophy that made GX excellent – abstract graphics model, resolution independence, professional typography – survived through each transformation. I recognised that quality in 1995, in 2000, and in 2025, without realising I was choosing the same team's work each time. Perhaps this indicates that certain kinds of graphical excellence are simply necessary for music notation, a constant need that has persisted since the last millennium. Or perhaps I'm simply stubborn enough to arrive at the same solutions regardless of how much time passes. A Curious TimingAnother detail emerged from the research. AlphaMask was acquired by OpenWave around 2001–2002, and the desktop product was discontinued. OpenWave wanted the technology for mobile browsers, not for professional graphics applications. Support ended, updates ceased. 2002 was also when NoteHeads fell silent. Whether that timing was coincidental or causal, I cannot say with certainty. Finding a replacement for AlphaMask's capabilities in 2002 would have been extraordinarily difficult – arguably impossible. The engineering effort to rebuild on different foundations would have been substantial. Perhaps the ponytailed pop zombies running NoteHeads at that point gave up when the graphics engine disappeared. Perhaps they simply declined to invest in solving the problem. I don't know if we'll ever have a definitive answer, and frankly, the question is less interesting than the pattern it reveals. What This Means for OoloiThe reassuring aspect of this circle is that it cannot break the same way again. Skia powers the rendering in Chrome, Android, Flutter, and countless other applications. It has billions of users. It's open-source, BSD-licensed, maintained by Google and a broad community. Even if Google stopped development – which won't happen, as Android depends on it – the codebase is available, the expertise exists, and the user base is large enough that maintenance would continue. Similarly, Ooloi runs on the JVM, which has multiple vendors: Oracle, Azul, Amazon, Microsoft, IBM, Red Hat, Eclipse. Battle-tested is a trite phrase, but it's accurate here. The JVM has been refined for nearly three decades across billions of deployments. It provides capabilities – proper concurrency models, cross-platform consistency, mature tooling – that enable much of Ooloi's architecture. Everything Ooloi depends upon is either open-source with massive adoption or has redundant commercial vendors ensuring longevity. This isn't accidental. This is architectural design informed by what happens when foundations disappear. The Unifying ThreadLooking back across thirty years, there appears to be a unifying pattern that I wasn't consciously aware of whilst making these decisions. A consistent need for graphical and typographical excellence. A recognition of quality when it appears, regardless of who built it or where it came from. A preference for sophisticated abstractions over quick implementations.
Perhaps I've learnt something during that time about building software that endures. Or perhaps I'm simply persistent enough to keep arriving at similar solutions when faced with similar problems. The distinction might not matter. What matters is that the circle closes. The technology that made Igor Engraver possible in 1995 has evolved, through the hands of its original creators, into the technology that makes Ooloi possible in 2025. And this time, the foundations cannot be deprecated on a whim or acquired into oblivion. |
AuthorPeter Bengtson – SearchArchives
August 2026
Categories
All
|
|
|
Ooloi is an open-source desktop music notation system for musicians who need stable, precise engraving and the freedom to notate complex music without workarounds. Scores and parts are handled consistently, remain responsive at scale, and support collaborative work without semantic compromise. They are not tied to proprietary formats or licensing.
Ooloi is currently under development. No release date has been announced.
|



RSS Feed