Re: GDP: renaming Program {usage, reference}

[Eyolf Østrem]

On 04.11.2007 (01:23), Graham Percival wrote:

> Eyolf Østrem wrote:
> >Sorry - my fault, I was thinking of the Program Usage, which to a large
> >extent has  to do with how to write code to produce a certain output (the
> >LP-book part) leaving bits and pieces which not necessarily belongs
> >together with the notation reference thematically, but which on the other
> >hand is so few pages, dealing with the fundamentals of how to run the
> >program, that it seems logical to have it in one place. 

> I don't follow -- especially the "to a large extent".

In the current version of lilypond-program.pdf, 12 out of 31 pages (not
counting the licence and the index) are about lilypond-book -- that's what
I meant with "to a large extent". The rest is Installation and setup (8pp),
command-line usage etc (7 pp), and the conversion utilities (3p).  

> In the newly-renamed Application Usage, is there anything other than 
> chapter 4 which you believe should be in NR?  I really can't see anything 
> of the sort.

No, only ch. 4 belongs in a Notation Ref., strictly speaking (even this is
debatable, depending on HOW strictly one is speaking). I'm thinking more of
the NR as the document that one would want to save to the harddisk,
or even print out as a handy reference to cover all the things that
one would need to know in the day-to-day dealings with LP. Given the
character of LP, as a compiler of external text files, and not a gui or a
wysiwyg environment, text input and compilation will always go hand in
hand. This is the reason why I'd like to have ch. 3 in the same book (on my
imaginary shelf, together with the vim manual and the LaTeX companion).
This would leave the three pages about conversion, which don't necessarily
belong in the same book, but which doesn't do any harm either. 2.2. Text
editor support could well defend its place in a notational referece: how to
edit LP code, which leaves 1 Install, which is more README or man
page-like, and setup, which is mainly about mac problems... 

In other words: if it is a strong editorial decision that there should be
one document which contains only the details about notational syntax and
nothing else, then my suggestion of course falls flat. The document I'm
talking about is broader: Everything You Need To Know To Produce A Score
With Lilypond (Once It's Installed And Provided You Don't Need To Change
Too Many Scheme Lists).

Eyolf

-- 
All hope abandon, ye who enter here!
                -- Dante Alighieri