RE: educational first draft
Graham Percival wrote 07 November 2007 16:29 Ok, I was convinced that some reorg was better. Educational - Editorial annotations Note heads - 1.1 Pitches 1.3.3 Analysis brackets - Editorial Take a look at it and let me know what you think. Docs in the usual GDP place. Much, much better! Cheers, - Graham Trevor D ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: educational first draft
Ok, I was convinced that some reorg was better. Educational - Editorial annotations Note heads - 1.1 Pitches 1.3.3 Analysis brackets - Editorial Take a look at it and let me know what you think. Docs in the usual GDP place. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: educational first draft
Graham Percival wrote: Ooo, I really like Editorial notation. Anybody object? Is it Editorial notation or rather Editorial annotations (or maybe these two alternatives have so similar meaning that it doesn't matter)? To me editorial notation gives the impression that it's something different from normal music typesetting notation, but I leave this to people with a better feeling for the English language. /Mats ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: educational first draft
Mats Bengtsson wrote: To me editorial notation gives the impression that it's something different from normal music typesetting notation, You have a point here. Basically, we just want to say stuff that makes music easier to read. I can't think of any short, formal-language phrase that says the same thing, though. Educational and Editorial could both be misinterpreted. Hmm... Legibility ? Notation to improve legibility ? Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: educational first draft
Graham Percival wrote 06 November 2007 08:54 Mats Bengtsson wrote: To me editorial notation gives the impression that it's something different from normal music typesetting notation, You have a point here. Basically, we just want to say stuff that makes music easier to read. I can't think of any short, formal-language phrase that says the same thing, though. Educational and Editorial could both be misinterpreted. Hmm... Legibility ? Notation to improve legibility ? Fingering is perhaps the most-used of these aids, so how about using that as an example in the heading: Fingering and other aids to readability, or if that's too long, maybe just Readability aids? But then you'd have to relocate Improvisation, Hidden notes, Blank music sheet and maybe Stems. Trevor D ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: educational first draft
Hope this is not too late to be of use. Graham Percival wrote on 03 November 2007 06:55 I've decided to do the rest of the first drafts right now. http://web.uvic.ca/~gperciva/ Here's the TODO list. Educational notation Was Educational use; name change? Quite a lot in this section is not really educational notation or use. Could the bits that are not educational be moved into the main text perhaps? - Improvisation: link to relevant section of This is one section that has nothing to do with education. In a negative sense it is to do with pitches - the lack of them. Would it be better there? Changing default? is this still valid? Not sure what this means introduce \with in LM? This appears in ambitus (which would also be better under Pitches, BTW). Yes, \with in LM would be good. REWRITE - most is pretty good. - Blank music sheet: add an example without tab staff. Check if there's a template for this already. Actually, move this to a template, and add this to modifying the templates to LM. Fine Cheers, - Graham Trevor D ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: educational first draft
Trevor Daniels wrote: Hope this is not too late to be of use. No, not at all. Educational notation Was Educational use; name change? No particular good reason. That said, I'm quite open to a real name change. Quite a lot in this section is not really educational notation or use. Could the bits that are not educational be moved into the main text perhaps? Specific suggestions, please. Either for renaming the whole section, or for moving stuff. (or both!) - Improvisation: link to relevant section of This is one section that has nothing to do with education. In a negative sense it is to do with pitches - the lack of them. Would it be better there? Hmm. We _do_ include no meter in Rhythms, so I suppose we could stuff no pitches in Pitches. I'm not convinced, though (either way). Any other opinions about this? This appears in ambitus (which would also be better under Pitches, BTW). Definitely agreed; moved. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: educational first draft
Graham Percival wrote: Was Educational use; name change? No particular good reason. That said, I'm quite open to a real name change. It seems to me that much of what's in this section could be classed as editorial rather than simply educational. So what about Editorial Notation or maybe Editorial and Educational Notations? Just a thought. Brett ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: educational first draft
Brett Duncan wrote: Graham Percival wrote: Was Educational use; name change? No particular good reason. That said, I'm quite open to a real name change. It seems to me that much of what's in this section could be classed as editorial rather than simply educational. So what about Editorial Notation or maybe Editorial and Educational Notations? Ooo, I really like Editorial notation. Anybody object? Of course, then it really looks like it should be moved into NR 2 Specialist notation. Again, any objections? Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
