Re: woodwind diagram docs

[Mike Solomon]

Hey all,
    I can work on this on September 8 - is this too late?
    David - I see what you mean regarding the covered holes, and I will make
that happen.  I think that I see what you mean regarding the property list
(ie each requested hole has properties such as "coveredness", "ring?"), but
if you sent a list of pertinent properties it'd make it more like that I get
it right the first time.
    If someone else would care to work on this before me (or if someone
would like to get to know the code by working on this with me), don't
hesitate to chime in.

Cheers,
Mike

On 8/22/10 3:03 AM, "David Kastrup" <address@hidden> wrote:

> Benjamin Peterson <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>> 061fe4a0a6dc06f2d5374f152173cdaac883575f add docs for woodwind diagrams to a
>> new
>> section, "Specialist notation -> winds." I think at least a mention of them
>> should be in "Common notation for wind instruments" where there's already a
>> discussion of fingering marks.
> 
> As to the syntax: I think that it is sort of clumsy to create half a
> million of identifiers for various coverage degrees of a hole combined
> with other features.  Scheme has fractions.  IIRC, the diagrams are
> pieced together programmatically anyway, so arbitrary numbers between 0
> and 1 could be supported while making the code actually simpler.
> 
> Instead of piling together attributes in an identifier name, it would
> seem more natural to create something like property lists.