[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lilypond manual intro
From: |
Janek Warchoł |
Subject: |
Re: lilypond manual intro |
Date: |
Sat, 8 Sep 2012 22:24:33 +0200 |
Hi Karl,
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Karl Berry <address@hidden> wrote:
> Ok, I go there (http://lilypond.org/website/text-input.html). And the
> example looks quite complex, what with numerous colors, arrows, etc.,
> etc. Not what I want to show my mom.
I'd make these examples simpler, too. But i guess we should wait with
that until the first round of GLISS is finished - for example, we may
decide to use english note names by default (instead/in addition to
dutch).
> I totally understand the goodness and desirability of \relative. I only
> question whether it is the absolute first (well, second) thing to tell
> people about. As that page itself says: "Relative mode can be confusing
> initially". I completely agree.
I think that \relative would be better explained by a picture with
arrowed explanations instead of the lengthy text description beginning
with "Relative mode can be confusing initially".
On Sat, Sep 8, 2012 at 9:06 PM, Graham Percival
<address@hidden> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 08, 2012 at 06:20:09PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
>>
>> Karl Berry wrote Friday, September 07, 2012 11:45 PM
>> > The first example there looks good (and is in fact what I sent her).
>> > But then the second example, instead of showing how to typeset other
>> > kinds of notation, goes into \relative. Is this really the next thing
>> > people want from a tutorial? I would have expected to see how to choose
>> > a different clef or time signature or type of note or ... anything but
>> > that.
>>
>> Again, a reasonable point to make, but as pretty well all the following
>> examples are in relative mode and as this is usually the best one for
>> beginners to use it seemed best to get this out of the way early, rather
>> than teaching absolute entry only to ditch it a few pages later.
>
> Yes. If anything, I think we should consider making the very
> first example \relative.
The question is: how do you introduce \relative without describing
absolute first? The first reference pitch for \relative has to be
written in absolute.
I was banging my head against the wall here when i was writing short
Lily course (4 pages) for my fellow choir members.
> (I'd also like to have an \absolute keyword so that doc examples
> using it could be more explicit,
+11!
> http://lilypond.org/doc/stable/Documentation/learning/index
> "redirects" to
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.16/Documentation/learning/index
> The same is true of
> http://lilypond.org/doc/stable/
wow! we really do have these! How come i didn't know about them??
I think it would be great to use these more often and encourage people
to use them. I vaguely remember cases of users looking at too old
documentation.
cheers & thanks for suggestions,
Janek
- lilypond manual intro, Karl Berry, 2012/09/08
- Re: lilypond manual intro, Trevor Daniels, 2012/09/08
- Re: lilypond manual intro,
Janek Warchoł <=
- Re: lilypond manual intro, Karl Berry, 2012/09/08
- Re: lilypond manual intro, Janek Warchoł, 2012/09/08
- Re: lilypond manual intro, Graham Percival, 2012/09/09
- Re: lilypond manual intro, Karl Berry, 2012/09/09
- Re: lilypond manual intro, Janek Warchoł, 2012/09/10
Re: lilypond manual intro, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2012/09/10