lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: footnotes and chord constructs


From: Federico Bruni
Subject: Re: footnotes and chord constructs
Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 11:07:17 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:10.0.11) Gecko/20121123 Icedove/10.0.11

Il 02/01/2013 10:33, David Kastrup ha scritto:
In the light of the above example working just fine, could you explain
>>  how one should have written the NR so that you would have been able to
>>  achieve what you wanted?
>>
>
>  A simple warning saying that \footnote must be used inside a chord
>  construct would have helped. I wouldn't give it for granted.
Exactly this has been said in the passage you quoted above:

>>>  Marking an entire chord in this manner is not possible since a chord
>>>  does not produce an event separate from that of its chord
>>>  constituents, but the constituents themselves can be marked.
Since you repeat your complaint after quoting the text, and even after
we had this brief discussion (which a reader of the manual will_not_
have at his disposal), it is obvious that this passage has been written
in a manner that fails to make readers realize its actual meaning.


What is confusing in this passage is what "constituent" means.
Does it refer to the notes of a chord or to each element of a chord (accidental and stem included)?

It _seems_ that this paragraph is directly related to the following paragraph (plus example about constituents):

"""
If the layout object being footmarked is indirectly caused by an event (like an Accidental or Stem caused by a NoteHead), an additional symbol argument, the grob-name, is required before the footnote text:

\book {
  \header { tagline = ##f }
  \relative c'' {
    % footnotes may be added to chord constituents
    < \single\footnote #'(-1 . -3) "Another flat" Accidental aes
      c
      \single\footnote #'(-1 . 0.5) "A flat" Accidental ees
    >2
    \single\footnote #'(-1 . 2) "A stem" Stem ees2
  }
}
"""

That's why I was caused to think that grob-name was required to attach a footnote to a note inside a chord.

I think that this should be explained separately and earlier.

Could you propose a replacement for this paragraph that might have
worked better for you?  It is not enough that you may find yourself able
to grasp its meaning after a back-and-forth discussion: the average
manual reader will not have this luxury at his disposal, or at least if
he has, we'd like it to be used on questions that are not supposedly
already answered in the manual.

If the text is not sufficiently obvious in the English text, the
situation will likely get even worse in the translations.  So we really
want to get the English text straightforward to the degree of being
blunt.

I would write it just in the beginning of Event-based footnotes:

"""
Event-based footnotes

The simplest form of event-based footnotes is just

\footnote offset footnote music
This kind of footnote is attached to a layout object directly caused by the event corresponding to music.

example..
"""

Now let's add a warning about chord constructs:

"""
Marking an entire chord (or a note inside a chord construct) in this manner is not possible since a chord does not produce an event separate from that of its chord constituents, but the constituents themselves can be marked:

< \footnote offset footnote music >
"""

I'm sorry, I don't understand well the topic and I'm not good at writing documentation. Hope it makes sense and can help someone who can write good documentation.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]