[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: constructive criticism
From: |
Han-Wen Nienhuys |
Subject: |
Re: constructive criticism |
Date: |
Thu, 8 Jan 2004 14:54:42 +0100 |
address@hidden writes:
> >
> >this is intentional, but I can understand that it is confusing.
> >
> >I've updated the tremolo entry of the manual with links. I've also
> >changed the SEEALSO section like this
> >
> > In this manual: *Tremolo subdivisions::, *Note Repeats::.
> >
> > Internals: tremolo beams are *Beam:: objects. Single stem tremolos are
> > *StemTremolo::s. The music expression is *note TremoloEvent::,
> >
> > Example files: `input/regression/chord-tremolo.ly',
> > `input/regression/stem-tremolo.ly'.
> >
> >
> >now what only needs to be done, is applying the same layout to all
> >other SEEALSO entries.
> >
> >(hint hint)
> >
> >
> Thanks this is now much clearer.
> What does it take to update this? I would be glad to help if needed.
Please! Show some initiative for yourself; I just answered the same
question this morning.
> Again the lazyness issue is related to wikis. The lowering of the
> threshold issue is partially an issue but truthfully the kiss method
> usually is the best. In my years as a tech writer, the best was
> expressed as simply and clearly as possible, and with the least amount
> of words.
>
> My experience with the lilypond docs are that they usually put in the
> least amount of information as possible, relying on the other sections
> of the documentation to fill in the missing pieces. This is in fact how
> programmers think, regular users will skip to the help they need as in
> F1 help and can get confused.
This is intentional: since things change in LilyPond regularly,
duplicating information makes maintaining the documentation much
harder. It is another form of using "the least amount of words." I
think a partial solution is to have more links within the document.
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys | address@hidden | http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
- Re: constructive criticism, (continued)
- Re: constructive criticism, Ferenc Wagner, 2004/01/07
- Re: constructive criticism, Aaron, 2004/01/08
- Re: constructive criticism, Mats Bengtsson, 2004/01/08
- Re: constructive criticism, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2004/01/08
- Re: constructive criticism, Ferenc Wagner, 2004/01/08
- Re: constructive criticism, Nick Busigin, 2004/01/08
- property syntax (was Re: constructive criticism), John Williams, 2004/01/09
- property syntax (was Re: constructive criticism), Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2004/01/10
- Re: constructive criticism, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2004/01/08
- Re: constructive criticism, Aaron, 2004/01/08
- Re: constructive criticism,
Han-Wen Nienhuys <=
- Re: constructive criticism, Aaron, 2004/01/08
- Re: constructive criticism, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2004/01/08
- Re: constructive criticism, Aaron, 2004/01/08
- was constructive criticism now tremolo revisited, Aaron, 2004/01/08
- was constructive criticism now tremolo revisited, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2004/01/08
- Re: constructive criticism, John Williams, 2004/01/08
- Re: constructive criticism, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2004/01/08
- Re: constructive criticism, Aaron, 2004/01/08
- Re: constructive criticism, Ferenc Wagner, 2004/01/08
- Re: constructive criticism, John Williams, 2004/01/09