RE: index entries for snippets
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
Re: index entries for snippets
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
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
