Re: Change \transpose to \relative in ancient.itely (issue 7538043)

[dak]

So many pitches are wrong in this patch that I think we should revert it
and have it redone carefully.

Possibly using some automatism (like Frescobaldi's absolute/relative
conversions, making sure that one gets the starting pitch right).

As it stands, this just changes too much.


https://codereview.appspot.com/7538043/diff/5001/Documentation/notation/ancient.itely
File Documentation/notation/ancient.itely (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/7538043/diff/5001/Documentation/notation/ancient.itely#newcode224
Documentation/notation/ancient.itely:224: \[ g c a f d' \]
This looks wrong.  Shouldn't it be
\[ g c, a' f d''
etc?  It would appear that you replaced \transpose c c' with
\relative c'' without bothering to convert _anything_ except the first
note from absolute to relative notation.

https://codereview.appspot.com/7538043/diff/5001/Documentation/notation/ancient.itely#newcode378
Documentation/notation/ancient.itely:378: \new MensuralVoice =
"discantus" \relative c' {
Why not \relative c'' if the starting pitch is c''?

https://codereview.appspot.com/7538043/diff/5001/Documentation/notation/ancient.itely#newcode952
Documentation/notation/ancient.itely:952: @c @end example
Where is the point in leaving random outcommented code in the document
and letting it get more and more outdated?

https://codereview.appspot.com/7538043/diff/5001/Documentation/notation/ancient.itely#newcode1645
Documentation/notation/ancient.itely:1645: \[ b \]
The original had b', but this would appear to be b instead.

https://codereview.appspot.com/7538043/diff/5001/Documentation/notation/ancient.itely#newcode1657
Documentation/notation/ancient.itely:1657: \relative c' {
Again, this is now b rather than b' as previously.

https://codereview.appspot.com/7538043/diff/5001/Documentation/notation/ancient.itely#newcode1688
Documentation/notation/ancient.itely:1688: \[ \auctum \ascendens b \]
This is b instead of b' now.

https://codereview.appspot.com/7538043/