Re: Doc: NR: 3.x Clarification for \keepWithTag and fix Typo in example (issue 279140043 by address@hidden)

[pkx166h]

https://codereview.appspot.com/279140043/diff/60001/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/279140043/diff/60001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode2319
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2319: \tag #'D { d4 d d d }
On 2016/02/21 12:17:12, simon.albrecht wrote:
> I’d suggest having one untagged hunk as well, to clarify behaviour on
these.

Can you give me the full example you'd like?

https://codereview.appspot.com/279140043/diff/60001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode2323
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2323: \keepWithTag #'(A B)
On 2016/02/22 17:05:13, dak wrote:
> On 2016/02/21 12:17:12, simon.albrecht wrote:
> > I do think we should advertise the proper LilyPond syntax of
> > \keepWithTag A.B
> > here. It’s quite easier to type and nicer. I’d also prefer
> > \tag A {}
> > over
> > \tag #'A {}
> > but I don’t know if this is enough of a ‘standard’ – David?

> Tags tended to be chosen in ways not matching a LilyPond "word", for
example
> containing numbers.  Since they are not used as \word but only ever as
symbols,
> there was no incentive to choose them compatibly before x.y acquired a
> Scheme-level meaning.

Sigh.

OK that means nothing to me (gobbledygook) and now I don't know what to
do with this information and the Patch remains stuck.

From what I *think* this means you are saying that unless I use a naming
convention for my Tags that are 'simple' and without numbers or spaces
or something else I have to use #' i.e.

\keepWithTag #'(violin2) {a b c d}

versus just

\keepWithTag violin {a b c d}

?

It doesn't hurt to explain when someone needs to use '# and I can figure
out how to express that in the doc but I don't really understand fully
what is being discussed here.

https://codereview.appspot.com/279140043/diff/60001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode2330
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2330: @code{#'D}.
On 2016/02/21 12:17:12, simon.albrecht wrote:
> I’d suggest

> ‘will only print music tagged @code{A} or @code{B} (and untagged
music).’

> (Is it overkill to mark single letters as @code{}?)

No. Users don't read the 'source' for doc and if we'd need to (for
example) italicize the text we'd need to use markups for that too.

But I should perhaps use @var instead of @code as these are ..what does
the CG call them? Ah yes.. 'metasyntactic variables'.

;)

https://codereview.appspot.com/279140043/