On Sun, 6 Jan 2008 14:21:15 -0500 Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Eyolf, > > On Jan 6, 2008, at 12:00 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > example, the problem is not so much knowing what it means -- that > > can be > > looked up quite easily
It *can be*. But *I'm* not going to bother. Why should I? I don't know the instrument, I don't care about the instrument; if the users of that instrument can't be bothered to help, then I won't be bothered to write docs for them. A very real example of this: vocal music. Yes, most users of lilypond are vocal people. But I'm not. So I've never edited the "Vocal music" section -- despite the fact that it's the most-read section. How do we do divisi lyrics? How do we align syllabels to notes? I don't have a clue, and I don't care to have a clue. (at this point, nobody can seriously accuse me of being lazy or unhelpful, so I have no trouble being completely blunt about this) > >- but to know (a) what kind of variations > > does a > > user expect? does size matter? angle? are different symbols or > > styles in > > use, and are they informative variations, etc.; (b) figure out how > > to effect all these variations through Lilypond code; (c) choose > > how much of > > this is really needed in the docs, and how much of it can be written > > meaningfully without violating the "don't comment the examples > > directly" > > principle. These are also important... > Perhaps I misunderstand the purpose of Graham's example question. The > quality and useful of answers would depend on asking the RIGHT > questions. ... but Reilly understood exactly my point. Here's an example -- the *only* example :) -- where I play the part of the helpful user. We'll pretend that Trevor Daniels (vocal guy) is editing the Orchestral string section. Trevor: What's this "artificial harmonics" garbage? Aren't all harmonics naturally occuring? Graham: It means you put two fingers on the string; the lower note is notated with a normal notehead, and the upper one is a harmonic. Trevor: cool. Like this? <a cis\harmonic>4 ? Graham: oops, sorry. No; it needs to be a fourth or a fifth. Like this <a d\harmoinc>2 <bes ees\harmonic>2 | <a e\harmoinc>2 <bes fes\harmonic>2 | Trevor: thanks, docs updated. (ideally I would have included the lilypond exapmle in my first reply, instead of waiting for another question from Trevor) If I didn't reply, Trevor *could* have found the answer. Maybe 15 minutes googling for the definition of artificial strings, maybe 10 minutes of figuring it out in lilypond... but as somebody who _knows_ orchestral strings, it only takes me 60 seconds to bash out a quick example. That saves Trevor almost half an hour of stumbling around in the dark -- all the while thinking "this is stupid, a string player should be doing this stuff". Oh, and I could also point out Stravinksi's customary "print the actual sounding pitch in a small black notehead above the two existing noteheads" trick. Again, that's something that's trivial for a string player, but not at all obvious to a vocalist. > In my experience, it is almost always more > informative to ask someone who is an "expert of sorts" in the area I > am confused. Exactly. > I think we disagree slightly on how my proposal would work (or, > perhaps, how people behave). If I have to notate a classical guitar > passage and I consult the Lilypond documentation and I find it > inadequate, it is expecting a lot of my --- aka, the casual music > engraver --- to rewrite the documentation and send it to > "somebody." (I don't even know to whom I would send it.) After a bit of searching, you'd find http://lilypond.org/web/devel/participating/documentation-adding which directs you to either me or the -devel list. But yes, it *is* asking a lot. That's why we're doing GDP: a limited-time push to seek out anybody who could contribute (or simply be consulted), so that we can ask questions in advance. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user