Re: proofreading tutorial

[Graham Percival]

Alard de Boer wrote:
> The tutorial is great! Some minor comments:
>
> 2.1.1 second footnote: These easiest -> The easiest
>
> 2.1.1 Section MacOS X, 2nd par: lilypond -> LilyPond (all other uses
> except the Unix command line have the two capital letters)
>
> 2.3.1 3rd paragraph: means that are -> means that they are
>
> 2.3.1 4th par: same time simple -> same time simply
>
> 2.3.1 5th par: maybe add "Also note that each note is relative to the
> previous one in the input, and not relative to the c'' in the \relative
> function."
>
> 2.3.1 6th par: exression -> expression
>
> 2.3.5 2nd par: angled -> angle
>
> 2.4.1 the lyrics are longer than the music, so there are no notes for
> "free" in the 2nd example or "free __" in the 3rd
> 2.5.4 2nd par: Identifiers -> With identifiers
>
> 2.5.4 4th par: should have -> must have (or are non-alphabetic
> characters allowed?)

Thanks, all updated.


> 2.4.2 the last example contains a comment for yourself (-gp); also you
> use \relative without a pitch here for the first time, which should be
> explained (or changed to use a pitch)

Whoops, I should have added a "FIXME"... I didn't find this comment when 
I was clearing up the FIXMEs.

The whole section 2.4.2 is the only one I didn't change.  At the top of 
the source for this section, I saw this:

@c TODO: revise this, \chords { } is shorter and more intuitive.

but I'm not certain what it means.  (I know even less about chords than 
I do about vocal music!)


Does anybody want to rewrite 2.4.2 (or simply vouch for the current 
correctness) ?  AFAIK, the current 2.4.2 was written back in the 1.2 or 
1.4 days.  Now, this info presented might still be correct, or it may be 
out of date and confusing.  I just need somebody who uses chords who can 
look at this section and let me know.

Cheers,
- Graham