GDP: six

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

GDP: six

Graham Percival-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GDP: six

v.villenave
2007/9/14, Graham Percival <[hidden email]>:
> http://lilypondwiki.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Doc

To me, it's the one.

:)

V.V.


_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GDP: six

Juergen Reuter
In reply to this post by Graham Percival-2
Just for the record:

Ancient notation _could_ be split genre-wise into two separate chunks
"Gregorian Chant" and "Mensural Notation".  However, for a _reference_
manual, I think it is ok as it currently is (e.g. having a single section
on ligatures rather than separate ones per genre).  For a _tutorial_,
however, IMO you definitely would like to split it genre-wise.

Greetings,
Juergen


_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GDP: six

Jean-Charles Malahieude
In reply to this post by Graham Percival-2
Le 14.09.2007 17:23, Graham Percival disait :
> http://lilypondwiki.tuxfamily.org/index.php?title=Doc
>
>
>
Sounds very promising. I like this progressive discovery.

Just one question: due to the alignement and their "timing effect",
wouldn't it be judicious to move the "grace notes" to the "1.2.6 Special
rhythmic concerns", at least through a link?


Cheers,
Jean-Charles



_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GDP: six

Graham Percival-2
Jean-Charles Malahieude wrote:
> Just one question: due to the alignement and their "timing effect",
> wouldn't it be judicious to move the "grace notes" to the "1.2.6 Special
> rhythmic concerns", at least through a link?

Of course we'll have @seealso links everywhere in the manual.  That's
not a concern.

That said, the "timing effect" argument has convinced me, so I moved
grace notes into 1.2.6.  Besides, I like having "grace notes" inside a
subsection called "special rhythmic concerns".

Cheers,
- Graham


_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GDP: six

v.villenave
In reply to this post by Juergen Reuter
2007/9/14, Juergen Reuter <[hidden email]>:

> Ancient notation _could_ be split genre-wise into two separate chunks
> "Gregorian Chant" and "Mensural Notation".  However, for a _reference_
> manual, I think it is ok as it currently is (e.g. having a single section
> on ligatures rather than separate ones per genre).  For a _tutorial_,
> however, IMO you definitely would like to split it genre-wise.

I would be OK to split the Ancient notation. Thanks for suggesting,
btw; feel free to suggest any other improvement you might think of,
since this whole part would otherwise remain more or less untouched --
as most of us, when it comes to such subjects, are complete
ignoramuses ;)

Regards,

Valentin


_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GDP: six

Graham Percival-2
Valentin Villenave wrote:

> 2007/9/14, Juergen Reuter <[hidden email]>:
>
>> Ancient notation _could_ be split genre-wise into two separate chunks
>> "Gregorian Chant" and "Mensural Notation".  However, for a _reference_
>> manual, I think it is ok as it currently is (e.g. having a single section
>> on ligatures rather than separate ones per genre).  For a _tutorial_,
>> however, IMO you definitely would like to split it genre-wise.
>
> I would be OK to split the Ancient notation. Thanks for suggesting,
> btw; feel free to suggest any other improvement you might think of,
> since this whole part would otherwise remain more or less untouched --
> as most of us, when it comes to such subjects, are complete
> ignoramuses ;)

Actually, I'd rather leave Ancient notation completely untouched until
somebody knowledgeable about it has the time to deal with it.  (that
doesn't just mean Juergen; there's other people around that use this)


In any case, I think it's safe to leave it alone until GDP would
naturally get to that section -- that will probably be in Dec or Jan.

Cheers,
- Graham


_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel