redundant entries in the indexes are confusing and lessening the clarity

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

redundant entries in the indexes are confusing and lessening the clarity

Eluze
in NR 2.19.1 Appendix D + E, a lot of commands are listed with and without the backslash - this seems unnecessary

some commands - eg. \single, \temporary and \undo - are only listed without backslash

imo commands should always be quoted including the backslash to make them quickly recognizable as commands.

counter-opinions?

Eluze
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: redundant entries in the indexes are confusing and lessening the clarity

pkx166h
On 01/02/14 09:44, Eluze wrote:

> in NR 2.19.1 Appendix D + E, a lot of commands are listed /with/ and
> /without/ the backslash - this seems unnecessary
>
> some commands - eg. \single, \temporary and \undo - are only listed
> /without/ backslash
>
> imo commands should always be quoted including the backslash to make them
> quickly recognizable as commands.
>
> counter-opinions?
>
> Eluze
>
See first:

http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=855

At least you're stepping into that territory, if only indirectly.

James


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

Re: redundant entries in the indexes are confusing and lessening the clarity

dak
James <[hidden email]> writes:

> On 01/02/14 09:44, Eluze wrote:
>> in NR 2.19.1 Appendix D + E, a lot of commands are listed /with/ and
>> /without/ the backslash - this seems unnecessary
>>
>> some commands - eg. \single, \temporary and \undo - are only listed
>> /without/ backslash
>>
>> imo commands should always be quoted including the backslash to make them
>> quickly recognizable as commands.
>>
>> counter-opinions?
>>
>> Eluze
>>
> See first:
>
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=855
>
> At least you're stepping into that territory, if only indirectly.

It's conceivable that once Texinfo 5.0 becomes ubiquitous, it will
become feasible to plug into the indexing step in a manner addressing
the problem and surviving a few versions.  Or at least communicate with
the Texinfo team in order to arrive at a state where this is possible.

--
David Kastrup


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

Re: redundant entries in the indexes are confusing and lessening the clarity

Eluze
In reply to this post by pkx166h
pkx166h wrote
On 01/02/14 09:44, Eluze wrote:
> in NR 2.19.1 Appendix D + E, a lot of commands are listed /with/ and
> /without/ the backslash - this seems unnecessary
>
> some commands - eg. \single, \temporary and \undo - are only listed
> /without/ backslash
>
> imo commands should always be quoted including the backslash to make them
> quickly recognizable as commands.
>
>
See first:

http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=855

At least you're stepping into that territory, if only indirectly.
thanks for the pointer!

as this is already recognized and in work the other point remains:

add \single, \temporary \undo and  more to the index - is that worth an entry in the tracker!?

Eluze
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: redundant entries in the indexes are confusing and lessening the clarity

pkx166h
On 01/02/14 10:14, Eluze wrote:

> pkx166h wrote
>> On 01/02/14 09:44, Eluze wrote:
>>> in NR 2.19.1 Appendix D + E, a lot of commands are listed /with/ and
>>> /without/ the backslash - this seems unnecessary
>>>
>>> some commands - eg. \single, \temporary and \undo - are only listed
>>> /without/ backslash
>>>
>>> imo commands should always be quoted including the backslash to make them
>>> quickly recognizable as commands.
>>>
>>>
>> See first:
>>
>> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=855
>>
>> At least you're stepping into that territory, if only indirectly.
> thanks for the pointer!
>
> as this is already recognized and in work the other point remains:
>
> add \single, \temporary \undo and  more to the index - is that worth an
> entry in the tracker!?
>
> Eluze
>
>
A tracker? I'd just create a patch and submit it (and create the tracker
with git-cl for that patch). Otherwise you are going to have to say
where you want the @cindex's specifically. Seems as you know how to make
a patch that you might as well do them and submit them yourself. I don't
think it is ever a bad idea to have index entries.

James

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

Re: redundant entries in the indexes are confusing and lesseningthe clarity

Trevor Daniels

James wrote Saturday, February 01, 2014 10:51 AM


> On 01/02/14 10:14, Eluze wrote:

>> add \single, \temporary \undo and  more to the index - is that worth an
>> entry in the tracker!?

> A tracker? I'd just create a patch and submit it (and create the tracker
> with git-cl for that patch). Otherwise you are going to have to say
> where you want the @cindex's specifically. Seems as you know how to make
> a patch that you might as well do them and submit them yourself. I don't
> think it is ever a bad idea to have index entries.

I agree.

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

Re: redundant entries in the indexes are confusing and lesseningthe clarity

Federico Bruni
2014/2/1 Trevor Daniels <[hidden email]>

>
> James wrote Saturday, February 01, 2014 10:51 AM
>
>
> > On 01/02/14 10:14, Eluze wrote:
>
> >> add \single, \temporary \undo and  more to the index - is that worth an
> >> entry in the tracker!?
>
> > A tracker? I'd just create a patch and submit it (and create the tracker
> > with git-cl for that patch). Otherwise you are going to have to say
> > where you want the @cindex's specifically. Seems as you know how to make
> > a patch that you might as well do them and submit them yourself. I don't
> > think it is ever a bad idea to have index entries.
>
> I agree.
>

Whoever takes this task, please consider also @cindex \bookpart:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2012-06/msg00146.html
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: redundant entries in the indexes are confusing and lesseningthe clarity

Eluze
Federico Bruni-5 wrote
2014/2/1 Trevor Daniels <[hidden email]>

>
> James wrote Saturday, February 01, 2014 10:51 AM
>
>
> > On 01/02/14 10:14, Eluze wrote:
>
> >> add \single, \temporary \undo and  more to the index - is that worth an
> >> entry in the tracker!?
>
> > A tracker? I'd just create a patch and submit it (and create the tracker
> > with git-cl for that patch). Otherwise you are going to have to say
> > where you want the @cindex's specifically. Seems as you know how to make
> > a patch that you might as well do them and submit them yourself. I don't
> > think it is ever a bad idea to have index entries.
>
> I agree.
>

Whoever takes this task, please consider also @cindex \bookpart:
why - they both (\book and \bookpart) are in both indexes, aren't they?!
(I don't know what @cindex means)

Eluze
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: redundant entries in the indexes are confusing and lesseningthe clarity

pkx166h
On 01/02/14 23:23, Eluze wrote:

> Federico Bruni-5 wrote
>> 2014/2/1 Trevor Daniels &lt;
>> t.daniels@.co
>> &gt;
>>
>>> James wrote Saturday, February 01, 2014 10:51 AM
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 01/02/14 10:14, Eluze wrote:
>>>>> add \single, \temporary \undo and  more to the index - is that worth
>>> an
>>>>> entry in the tracker!?
>>>> A tracker? I'd just create a patch and submit it (and create the
>>> tracker
>>>> with git-cl for that patch). Otherwise you are going to have to say
>>>> where you want the @cindex's specifically. Seems as you know how to
>>> make
>>>> a patch that you might as well do them and submit them yourself. I
>>> don't
>>>> think it is ever a bad idea to have index entries.
>>> I agree.
>>>
>> Whoever takes this task, please consider also @cindex \bookpart:
> why - they both (\book and \bookpart) *are* in both indexes, aren't they?!
> (I don't know what @cindex means)
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/contributor-big-page.html#syntax-survey

Scroll down to 'indexing'

James

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

Re: redundant entries in the indexes are confusing and lesseningthe clarity

Federico Bruni
In reply to this post by Eluze
2014/2/2 Eluze <[hidden email]>

> > Whoever takes this task, please consider also @cindex \bookpart:
>
> why - they both (\book and \bookpart) *are* in both indexes, aren't they?!
> (I don't know what @cindex means)


they are currently indexed only with @funindex, as you can see with:

cd Documentation
git grep 'index \\book'

so they are listed only under \ and not under B, where most people would
search them.
This is the mentioned issue 855.
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: redundant entries in the indexes are confusing and lesseningthe clarity

Eluze
Federico Bruni-5 wrote
2014/2/2 Eluze <[hidden email]>

> (I don't know what @cindex means)

they are currently indexed only with @funindex, as you can see with:

cd Documentation
git grep 'index \\book'
this documentation doesn't seem to exist on my computer
so they are listed only under \ and not under B, where most people would
search them.
This is the mentioned issue 855.
having it under B with the \ is my favorite


I reg-searched the NR and found the attached list of commands which are not in the index (I don't claim it's complete):

missing_commands.ly

I'm not sure all of them should be added (eg. \sourcefileline and \sourcefilename)

Eluze
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: redundant entries in the indexes are confusing and lesseningthe clarity

Federico Bruni
2014/2/2 Eluze <[hidden email]>

> Federico Bruni-5 wrote
> > 2014/2/2 Eluze &lt;
>
> > eluzew@
>
> > &gt;
> >
> >> (I don't know what @cindex means)
> >
> > they are currently indexed only with @funindex, as you can see with:
> >
> > cd Documentation
> > git grep 'index \\book'
>
> this documentation doesn't seem to exist on my computer
>
>
I don't understand what you mean... I was trying to show this result:

$ cd lilypond-git/Documentation
$ git grep 'index \\book' learning/ notation/
learning/fundamental.itely:@funindex \book
learning/fundamental.itely:@funindex \book
notation/input.itely:@funindex \book
notation/input.itely:@funindex \book
notation/input.itely:@funindex \bookpart
notation/input.itely:@funindex \bookOutputSuffix
notation/input.itely:@funindex \bookOutputName
notation/input.itely:@funindex \book
notation/input.itely:@funindex \bookpart
notation/spacing.itely:@funindex \bookpart




> > so they are listed only under \ and not under B, where most people would
> > search them.
> > This is the mentioned issue 855.
>
> having it under B with the \ is my favorite
>
>
I agree

then
@cindex \bookpart
...

should do the trick
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: redundant entries in the indexes are confusing and lesseningthe clarity

Eluze
Federico Bruni-5 wrote
2014/2/2 Eluze <[hidden email]>

> Federico Bruni-5 wrote
> > 2014/2/2 Eluze <
>
> > eluzew@
>
> > >
> >
> >> (I don't know what @cindex means)
> >
> > they are currently indexed only with @funindex, as you can see with:
> >
> > cd Documentation
> > git grep 'index \\book'
>
> this documentation doesn't seem to exist on my computer
>
>
I don't understand what you mean... I was trying to show this result:

$ cd lilypond-git/Documentation
$ git grep 'index \\book' learning/ notation/
learning/fundamental.itely:@funindex \book
learning/fundamental.itely:@funindex \book
notation/input.itely:@funindex \book
notation/input.itely:@funindex \book
notation/input.itely:@funindex \bookpart
notation/input.itely:@funindex \bookOutputSuffix
notation/input.itely:@funindex \bookOutputName
notation/input.itely:@funindex \book
notation/input.itely:@funindex \bookpart
notation/spacing.itely:@funindex \bookpart
probably a misunderstanding - I only download the released versions and have not installed git.

Eluze