On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 12:09:10PM +0800, Graham Breed wrote: > I've been investigating the new pitch model with Hans. It is, in > fact, better than either of us thought but some of that isn't > documented. So pay attention.
Great! I'm not certain if any of the doc team has much experience with microtones -- let's just assume that they don't. Could you propose some changes to the docs to make this more clear? Ideally it would look something like this: ---- In NR 15.2.4 Accidentals, add this paragraph and example after the third current paragraph: blah blah blah \relative c' { b4 l8 a8 h4 } In addition, please add a new subsection NR 15.2.5 Changing default microtone definitions, which would contain the following: blee blee blee \relative c' { b4 l16 e32 e4.. } blargl blargl \relative c' { b4 \times 2/3{ l8 a r} g8.. l4*4/3 e8 } --- Even if your proposed changes need a bit of modification to fit into the existing docs, having a concrete proposal will help us a lot. Again, please assume that the doc team knows nothing about microtones -- this will help us avoid misunderstandings. > First, alterations are specified in terms of what the documentation > vaguely calls "whole tones". They are specifically intervals of 200 > cents or steps of 6 note equal temperament. For many tunings the size > of a tone or double sharp will not have this value. Could you identify specific place(s) where this should be stated, and/or reword the sentences to avoid the vague "whole tones" term? Any doc person want to be the contact person for this? If not, I could handle it. (kind-of starting GOP two weeks early) Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel