lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GDP: six


From: Graham Percival
Subject: Re: GDP: six
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2007 13:10:11 -0700
User-agent: Icedove 1.5.0.12 (X11/20070607)

Eyolf Østrem wrote:
On 14.09.2007 (08:23), Graham Percival wrote:
http://lilypondwiki.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Doc

 * 1 Notation Reference
         o 1.1 Pitches

I don't like the sectioning of this one. Why is "Transpose" and
"Instrument transpositions" split up? It doesn't make sense to me.
Ottava brackets should also belong here somewhere.

Instrument transpositions affects how pitches are displayed in cues and on midi. Ottava displays how pitches are displayed.

Transpose affects the actual _pitches_. Remember our distinction between content and presentation.

{ fis''' }
is that note, regardless of instrument transpositions or ottava. If we stick \transpose, then fis''' will produce a different pitch.

Also, "Changing multiple pitches" -- it sounds precise, but it isn't
necessarily so. At least it sounds unnecessarily complex

I'm not wild about that name; please suggest an alternative.

Join "Note names in other languages" with "Writing pitches" - that's
where it belongs.

"Note names in other languages" _is_ in "writing pitches".  

That leaves Clef and Key signature, which might come first -- since
it's fairly fundamental -- or last, since it falls a little on the
side of the other items. Thus:

Again, these clearly affect the way we _display_ pitches, not the actual _pitches_ themselves.


                   + Repeats and MIDI

I wonder: isn't it more natural to gather the midi stuff in one place
and just have a cross reference here?

Repeats is slated for a huge rewrite anyway. I have no objection whatsoever to removing this subsection and putting in a link. But please raise this issue again when we come to Repeats (probably in 5 or 6 weeks), since I have many other issues to keep track of.


 o 1.7 Educational use   (or "increasing readibility" ?)

I don't like this one, I must say. Neither font size, improvisation,
or shape notes or fingering have much to do with educational use in my
book.

They make the music easier to read. Again, I'm not wild about the section name, as you can tell from the (?) in the name.

I think font size should go in a page layout section or something (at
least that's how I use it, but I can also see how it would fit here).
The sections are ok, I guess, but please don't call it all educational
use... How about "Appearance Tweaks" or something?

hmm... I'd rather avoid the term "tweaks", since we use that elsewhere to mean \override stuff. "Modifying appearance for legibility" is too long.

(whoops, "notation font size" should go in "inside the staff".  fixed.)


I'm quite happy with having a section that includes those subsections, but I'm seriously stumped as to what to call it.

Cheers,
- Graham




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]