Re: Renaming NR 3

[Jay Hamilton]

Trevor-
I wouldn't put concepts and a properties later it's information that's needed 
in that order of learning to use the program.
In fact I'd probably put it first in the 'chapter' and then have the Input and 
Output  follow (pedagogically)

Does the title have to be short?
If not could it be more explanatory?
i.e.
Useful concepts and controlling input and output.



Yours-
Jay

Jay Hamilton
www.soundand.com

Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 09:04:47 +0100
From: "Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden>
Subject: GDP: Renaming NR 3
To: "Lily-Devel List" <address@hidden>, "Lilypond-User List"
        <address@hidden>
Message-ID: <address@hidden>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
        reply-type=original

Chapter 3 in the Notation Reference is currently named "Input syntax", but 
the contents in the latest revision of the 2.11 docs are much wider than the 
name implies and I'd like to change it.  The trouble is, the contents are 
rather diverse, being mainly the left-overs from chapters 1 & 2. 
Suggestions very welcome!

[John: hang on with the translations until we decide this!]

Here's an outline of the current contents of the NR:

1. Musical notation
2. Specialist notation
3. Input syntax
     Input structure
     Useful concepts and properties
     Titles and headers
     Working with input files
     Controlling output
     MIDI output
4. Spacing issues
5. Changing defaults
6. Interfaces for programmers

Possibilities:

3. General notation
3. Further notation
3. General concepts
3. General notation and concepts
3. Non-musical notation
3. Miscellaneous topics

Another more radical alternative would be to move "Useful concepts and 
properties" into Chapter 5, leaving just input and output topics in Chapter 
3, which could then be re-organised as:

3. Input and output files [or some such name]
     Input structure
     Working with input files
     Titles and headers
     Controlling output
     MIDI output

Would this be better?  What might this be called?

Trevor





------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2008 12:03:44 +0200
From: John Mandereau <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: 2008 Community Choice Awards; call for votes
To: Valentin Villenave <address@hidden>
Cc: Trevor Ba?a <address@hidden>, address@hidden
Message-ID: <address@hidden>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 2008/06/06 19:09 +0200, Valentin Villenave wrote:
> 2008/6/6 Trevor Ba��a <address@hidden>:
> > I've done likewise on Sourceforge ...
> 
> +1!

I'd like to do so, but ugh, non-SourceForge projects may have little
hope with this voting system: if you go to
http://sourceforge.net/community/cca08-nominate and search for
"LilyPond", you'll see all combinations of name and URL used in votes.
I'm afraid this means our votes will be cluttered in that many
instances, unless SourceForge merge duplicates project entries before
counting votes.



> I don't like SourceForge at all, but such events are a nice thing for
> the community.

I agree, and I'd like to remind us than LilyPond is not just "open
source", it's free software!

Cheers,
John





------------------------------

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


End of lilypond-user Digest, Vol 67, Issue 21
*********************************************