On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 10:01:30 +0100 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote:
> Renato <renn...@gmail.com> writes: > > > On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 18:14:52 -0000 > > "Phil Burfitt" <phil.burf...@talktalk.net> wrote: > > > >> >you don't really get around these programs without reading docs > >> >(and you shouldn't try to make it easy). > >> > >> I disagree with "you shouldn't try to make it easy". > > > > what I meant was "you shouldn't try to make it easy to get around > > fiddling with the program without reading the docs", i.e. you > > shouldn't try to encourage not reading the docs > > Why? I find nothing wrong with things that work as expected as much > as possible. It is not a sign of good design if naive expectations > turn out wrong again and again. The purpose of LilyPond is > typesetting music, not a puzzle game. As it is a language composed > of arbitrary letters on the keyboard, one needs something to start > off, true. An environment with default templates or a sample > document/run-through at least gives the user enough of a clue to know > when he needs to look at more stuff or can try figuring out something > by himself. > > But when he _does_ try figuring out something by himself, then it's > nice if at least some things work out as expected instead of failing > for obscure technical reasons. > > There is no point in exhausting the tolerance levels of the user just > for kicks. Learning stuff must have proportional rewards, or at some > point people stop. > > And that means we need a user experience where you are not stuck for > days in the docs before getting out your first notes. > Hi, I feel like you misinterpreted what I'm saying. All the things you say are good of course: sensible syntax, good "getting started" documentation, templates, not exhausting the user. I'm not saying you should purposefully make lilypond obscure, just saying that you should not encourage people not reading the docs, i.e. hiding complexity. I feel that many WYSYWIG editors try to make complex things easy, and that's usually impossible by definition, so you end up sacrificing flexibility for the sake of making a good impression on users. I would like if lilypond never went down that path. But that's just my opinion, I'm not a developer nor a professional (not even amateur) musical typesetter, so I'll just shup up now :=) cheers, renato
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
