RE: index entries for snippets

2008-02-08 Thread Trevor Daniels

Graham Percival wrote on 08 February 2008 21:26
> 
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 21:08:08 -
> "Trevor Daniels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > @cindex natural sign, suppressing
> > 
> > At present the only entry for naturals takes you to
> > a section on text markup commands.  Not helpful if
> > you're looking for a way to suppress extra naturals.
> 
> Well, obviously we want a
> @cindex natural sign
> 
> at the top of Accidentals.  (Ralph?)
> 
> Assuming that we have that, do you still think we need a
> @cindex natural sign, suppressing
> 
> for the snippets?  I mean, if "natural sign" 
> points to the top of
> the page anyway, dos "natural sign, suppressing" 
> really add anything?
> 
Maybe not.  In this case the page is quite short, so
reading through it is not too onerous.  But without
the "suppressing" entry the user looking for how to
suppress naturals does not know whether or not it is 
there - he has to read through the page on the 
off-chance it may contain what he seeks.  With the 
specific index entry he will -know- that what he is 
looking for -is- on that page.  That's the difference
and that's why it is helpful to include it.
 
> Cheers,
> - Graham
> 



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


Re: index entries for snippets

2008-02-08 Thread Graham Percival
On Fri, 8 Feb 2008 21:08:08 -
"Trevor Daniels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> @cindex natural sign, suppressing
> 
> At present the only entry for naturals takes you to
> a section on text markup commands.  Not helpful if
> you're looking for a way to suppress extra naturals.

Well, obviously we want a
@cindex natural sign

at the top of Accidentals.  (Ralph?)

Assuming that we have that, do you still think we need a
@cindex natural sign, suppressing

for the snippets?  I mean, if "natural sign" points to the top of
the page anyway, dos "natural sign, suppressing" really add
anything?

Cheers,
- Graham


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


RE: index entries for snippets

2008-02-08 Thread Trevor Daniels

Graham Percival wrote on 08 February 2008 19:49
> 
> Do we want index entries for snippets?  For example, in
>   NR 1.1.3.2 Key signature
> there are two snippets: suppressing natural signs in key
> signatures, and non-standard key signatures.
> 
> Do you want to have items like:
> @cindex key signatures, suppressing natural signs
> @cindex don't print natural signs in key signatures
> @cindex key signatures, non-standard
> @cindex key signatures, whole tone

These are not helpful, especially the one beginning
with "don't", which is silly, but I would like both 
these snippets to be indexed with

@cindex natural sign, suppressing

At present the only entry for naturals takes you to
a section on text markup commands.  Not helpful if
you're looking for a way to suppress extra naturals.
 
> More examples are in
>   NR 1.2.1.2 Tuplets
> 
> such as
> @funindex tupletNumberFormatFunction
> @funindex tupletSpannerDuration
> and
> @cindex tuplet bracket length
> @cindex triplet bracket length
> @cindex bracket length, tuplets 

An index is helpful only if it includes the term the
user has in mind when he conducts a search.  Sure,
if that term isn't found, he'll try another, but the
whole point of an index is to make it as quick and
easy as possible to go from query to answer.
So index entries should be constructed by thinking
of what questions the user might have which could
be answered by reading this section, and index the
key terms in the questions, not the terms in the
answer.  So these are good (I wrote them, so I have
to support them ;)

> Cheers,
> - Graham
> 
Trevor D




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user