Re: GDP: fourth rearrangement

[Graham Percival]

Valentin Villenave wrote:

2007/9/14, Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


Err... why?  What's the difference between looking at a list of markup
commands in section 8.1.8 or 1.8.3 or Appendix M ?


There's none. Appendix aren't meant to contain daily vital stuff, that's all :)


What, like a list of all Feta font characters, or notehead styles, or 
colours?


This is totally something for appendix C.



As for the US/UK debates, Ian raised something about bars/measures on
http://lilypondwiki.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Talk:Doc maybe you
guys could go arguing there as well ;)


I've left a message on that page, but I'll repeat it here: please keep 
discussion about the docs on the mailist.  I think it's important that 
there's a single place to discuss this stuff.


Cheers,
- Graham


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

Re: GDP: fourth rearrangement

[Neil Puttock]

On 9/14/07, Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Neil Puttock wrote:
> > On 9/14/07, *Graham Percival* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > wrote:
>
> > No; we should use "staff" and "staves".  One of the instructions for
> the
> > Trivial/Easy will be to fix any such mistakes.
> >
> >
> > Hmm... I'm detecting a distinctly American bias here.
>
> As a Canadian, I always try to write good English, not that other
> language.  Other than "-ise".  "-ize" looks much cooler, since it has a
> "z" in it.  :)


I do apologize; I shouldn't make assumptions.

I don't have any beef with "-ize"; if it's good enough for the OED, it's
fine by me.

> I wonder whether there's space for a Queen's English translation. ;)
>
> Really?  Do people across the pond say "staffs" ?  It sounds like the
> kind of thing an American would come up with.


In the UK, we say stave/staves.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: GDP: fourth rearrangement

[Valentin Villenave]

2007/9/14, Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Err... why?  What's the difference between looking at a list of markup
> commands in section 8.1.8 or 1.8.3 or Appendix M ?

There's none. Appendix aren't meant to contain daily vital stuff, that's all :)

> I mean, yes, we plan on improving all sections of the manual, but why
> single out the list of markup commands?

I was mostly thinking out loud: "Oh; I musn't forget to write at last
decent documentation for all these commands that have been making me
tear my hair out for months..."

Btw: every notation software I've ever outthere used uses staff/staves.

As for the US/UK debates, Ian raised something about bars/measures on
http://lilypondwiki.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Talk:Doc maybe you
guys could go arguing there as well ;)

Valentin


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

Re: GDP: fourth rearrangement

[Graham Percival]

Neil Puttock wrote:
On 9/14/07, *Graham Percival* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> wrote:



No; we should use "staff" and "staves".  One of the instructions for the
Trivial/Easy will be to fix any such mistakes.


Hmm... I'm detecting a distinctly American bias here.


As a Canadian, I always try to write good English, not that other 
language.  Other than "-ise".  "-ize" looks much cooler, since it has a 
"z" in it.  :)



I wonder whether there's space for a Queen's English translation. ;)


Really?  Do people across the pond say "staffs" ?  It sounds like the 
kind of thing an American would come up with.


Cheers,
- Graham


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

Re: GDP: fourth rearrangement

[Neil Puttock]

On 9/14/07, Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Mats Bengtsson wrote:
> > - You have a much better feeling for the English language than I do, but
> >  do you think that we should keep the current mixture of "staff" and
> > "stave"
> >  to denote the same thing, for example in the subsection titles within
> > "Staff notation"?
>
> No; we should use "staff" and "staves".  One of the instructions for the
> Trivial/Easy will be to fix any such mistakes.
>

Hmm... I'm detecting a distinctly American bias here.

I wonder whether there's space for a Queen's English translation. ;)
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: GDP: fourth rearrangement

[Graham Percival]

Valentin Villenave wrote:

2007/9/14, Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


As Valentin said; the markup commands are even more of a reference.
Hmm... actually, what about moving these into an Appendix?


Agreed, but if we do, we'll have to improve the actual markup manual
section, so that users only exceptionally have to digg into these
lists (as it is now, I almost have to browse them twice a day). When
it's time, I can write this part of the GDP if none else wants to.


Err... why?  What's the difference between looking at a list of markup 
commands in section 8.1.8 or 1.8.3 or Appendix M ?


I mean, yes, we plan on improving all sections of the manual, but why 
single out the list of markup commands?


Cheers,
- Graham


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

Re: GDP: fourth rearrangement

[Valentin Villenave]

2007/9/14, Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> As Valentin said; the markup commands are even more of a reference.
> Hmm... actually, what about moving these into an Appendix?

Agreed, but if we do, we'll have to improve the actual markup manual
section, so that users only exceptionally have to digg into these
lists (as it is now, I almost have to browse them twice a day). When
it's time, I can write this part of the GDP if none else wants to.

Valentin


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

Re: GDP: fourth rearrangement

[Graham Percival]

Mats Bengtsson wrote:

- You have a much better feeling for the English language than I do, but
 do you think that we should keep the current mixture of "staff" and 
"stave"
 to denote the same thing, for example in the subsection titles within 
"Staff notation"?


No; we should use "staff" and "staves".  One of the instructions for the 
Trivial/Easy will be to fix any such mistakes.


I think I wrote "when dealing with multiple @internalsref{Staff}s, you 
can...", but such phrases should be rephrased to "multiple @{Staff} 
contexts".


- How about adding some section like "Other typesetting features", which 
could
 contain things that don't really fit in anywhere else, like the four I 
mentioned above.


I've expanded the Education section to include all of these things.  I'm 
not wild about the name "Education", but I think all these items work 
well inside that section (whatever we name the section).


- Again, I might not have the right intuition for English language, but 
how about
 replacing "Text in a score" with something along the lines of "Textual 
annotations"

 I would also move "New dynamic marks" from 1.17.2 to 1.17.1.


To match other subsection titles, I called it "Writing text".


- Why doesn't Text markup commands belong under 1.17.2 Text markup?


As Valentin said; the markup commands are even more of a reference. 
Hmm... actually, what about moving these into an Appendix?


Cheers,
- Graham


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

Re: fourth rearrangement

[Graham Percival]

Trevor Daniels wrote:

Do you plan to have links pointing to the substantive
section from other sections in which people might look?   For
example, I might look under 1.2.1 Writing rhythms for grace
notes and it would be useful to find there a link saying
grace notes are to be found under 1.3.3 Other Expressive
marks - "For grace notes see ...".


Yes, of course; many links like that are planned.

Cheers,
- Graham


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

RE: fourth rearrangement

[Trevor Daniels]

Hi Graham

>
> Based on the feedback, it seems that most users
> would vastly prefer
> something like this?
> http://lilypondwiki.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Doc
>

I like this layout; the criterion being whether I would look
in the right section for the answers to questions.  I
especially like the new arrangement for vocal music.  Two
comments of detail:

Should 1.4 Staff notation include a subsection on Staff
groupings, maybe?

Metronome marks currently in 1.4.2 perhaps would be better
in the Displaying Rhythms section 1.2.2.  This would then
permit a rearrangement of subsections 1.4.2 and 1.4.3 to
something like

1.4.2 Writing parts
   + Instrument names
   + Cue notes
   + Quoting other voices

Do you plan to have links pointing to the substantive
section from other sections in which people might look?  For
example, I might look under 1.2.1 Writing rhythms for grace
notes and it would be useful to find there a link saying
grace notes are to be found under 1.3.3 Other Expressive
marks - "For grace notes see ...".

Trevor (D)





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

Re: GDP: fourth rearrangement

[Mats Bengtsson]

Looks great! A few minor details:

- In Rhythms, I would like to rearrange the order a bit, to put the most
 common aspects at the top. For example:

1.2 Rhythms
  1.2.1 Writing rhythms
  + Durations
  + Augmentation dots
  + Tuplets
  + Scaling durations
  1.2.2 Writing rests
  + Rests
  + Skips 
  + Multi measure rests

  1.2.3 Bars
  + Bar check
  + Bar lines
  + Bar numbers
  + Barnumber check
  + Rehearsal marks 
  1.2.4 Displaying rhythms

  + Time signature
  + Partial measures
  + Unmetered music
  + Polymetric notation
  + Automatic note splitting
  + Automatic beams
  + Manual beams
  + Feathered beams 
  1.2.5 Special rhythmic concerns
  + Aligning to cadenzas 
  + Time administration

  + Proportional notation (introduction)



- You have a much better feeling for the English language than I do, but
 do you think that we should keep the current mixture of "staff" and 
"stave"
 to denote the same thing, for example in the subsection titles within 
"Staff notation"?


- I'm sure some people don't agree that "Fingering instructions" belong to
 "Educational use", but it's OK with me. Same goes for "Ambitus"

- "Coloring objects" and "Parentheses" do not only apply to Note heads and
 stems, in general.

- How about adding some section like "Other typesetting features", which 
could
 contain things that don't really fit in anywhere else, like the four I 
mentioned above.


- Again, I might not have the right intuition for English language, but 
how about
 replacing "Text in a score" with something along the lines of "Textual 
annotations"

 I would also move "New dynamic marks" from 1.17.2 to 1.17.1.

- Why doesn't Text markup commands belong under 1.17.2 Text markup?

   /Mats

Graham Percival wrote:
Based on the feedback, it seems that most users would vastly prefer 
something like this?

http://lilypondwiki.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Doc

Numbered titles are new HTML pages; un-numbered titles are on the same 
HTML page.


Sections 1.9 through 1.16 weren't put into the same arrangement, but 
you can imagine how it would continue.


- Graham


___
lilypond-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel




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

Re: GDP: fourth rearrangement

[Trevor Bača]

On 9/13/07, Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Based on the feedback, it seems that most users would vastly prefer
> something like this?
> http://lilypondwiki.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Doc
>
> Numbered titles are new HTML pages; un-numbered titles are on the same
> HTML page.
>
> Sections 1.9 through 1.16 weren't put into the same arrangement, but you
> can imagine how it would continue.


Great structure, IMO.

Like it!


Trevor.


-- 
Trevor Bača
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

GDP: fourth rearrangement

[Graham Percival]

Based on the feedback, it seems that most users would vastly prefer 
something like this?

http://lilypondwiki.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Doc

Numbered titles are new HTML pages; un-numbered titles are on the same 
HTML page.


Sections 1.9 through 1.16 weren't put into the same arrangement, but you 
can imagine how it would continue.


- Graham


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