Re: GDP: What term do you use?

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Damian (et al):

> semantically i completely disagree... ;--)

Excellent! I like a good discussion...  =)

> in the case of a 'transposing at the octave' instrument such as  
> piccolo or double bass,
> the clef change or 8va/b sign is implied and simply omitted as a  
> convenience.

Aside: we (all) should immediately stop doing that -- we should start  
writing ALL instruments with "transposed clefs", to be clear.  ;-)

Regardless, the question (for me) still comes down to the way we are  
presenting "transposition" in the documentation. Does "transposition"  
mean taking a set of pitches and changing the pitches that we want to  
hear (e.g., \transpose c g { a b c d }) or leaving the pitches we  
want to hear as is (explicitly, \transpose c c { a b c d}) and  
*notating* them in a non-trivial/non-obvious way?

One process (transposition) alters the original pitches, the other  
(clef *or* octavation) is simply a notational convention -- two very  
different results, IMO.

Most importantly to the current issue, when looking in the Lilypond  
documentation for information on ottava brackets:
    1. I would never search for "transposition";
    2. The heading "octave transposition" is less accurately  
descriptive of the intended content than "ottava brackets".

Our goal in all of this should be to IMPROVE the documentation, not  
make it less clear.

Cheers,
Kieren.