[Top][All Lists]

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

RE: Documentation - index bug - noteheads

From: Anthony Youngman
Subject: RE: Documentation - index bug - noteheads
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:19:37 +0100


Section 6.6.1 should just be indexed as "NoteHead". It contains an
example of its use - indeed as I say the only example that appears to be
for generic use. Looking at it in the index led me to believe the
references were for ancient music (although in part that was me not
looking hard enough, but I still wouldn't have found what I was looking

The existing "note heads" entry should be retitled "note heads, ancient"
because it points you at "7.7.1 Ancient note heads". Actually, having
found and looked at the index for NoteHead, the "note heads" entry
should either be dropped, or expanded to make it consistent with
NoteHead. I'd prefer the latter, but the result will be a bloated index

Suggestions are "note heads, special" for 8.4.5, "note heads, shape" for
8.5.4, "note heads, easy notation" for 8.5.5 (sorry this was what I was
looking for as a "practice notehead" - I obviously didn't look hard

By the way, is there an overarching philosophy behind the manual, or has
it "just growed" as users have made suggestions? It seems to me as
though a dedicated section on noteheads might make sense (I'm not saying
I'll write it - there are other things I'm trying to find time for -
like learning Scheme so I can fix headers the way I want them...). But
it's an idea.


-----Original Message-----
From: Graham Percival [mailto:address@hidden 
Sent: 07 June 2006 10:45
To: Anthony Youngman
Cc: lily-devel
Subject: Re: Documentation - index bug - noteheads

On 7-Jun-06, at 1:59 AM, Anthony Youngman wrote:

> Section 6.6.1 of the manual provides an example of altering noteheads
> (exactly the example I was looking for :-). It's not indexed, either
> under NoteHead, or anything similar. And it needs to be as, as far as
> can tell, it is the only place where this particular technique is
> discussed (the index only seems to point to generic discussion or
> ancient noteheads).

So what should it be indexed as?

> On a related point, I did a cursory search in the index for pointers
> the practice noteheads (you know, the ones with the note letter
> in the note) and they don't seem to be indexed either. Maybe I'm 
> looking
> under the wrong term, but some variant of notehead would make sense
> imho.

So what should it be indexed as?

Please take another two minutes before sending an email to make 
concrete proposals.  If you tell me "please add an index entry for 
`noteheads, fuzzy' in section 6.6.1 Articulations", then I can easily 
glance at the section and judge whether "fuzzy" is a relevant index 
term.  If you just say "you know, I did a cursory search for ouratranes 
(you know, they look like squiggly horizontal lines) and they don't 
seem to be indexed.  Could you add something to the index about these?" 
then it takes me five times as long -- I need to figure out what you're 
talking about, where it appears in the manual, what kind of index terms 
are good, etc.  If you've just looked for something in the docs, then 
you're more familiar with that item than I am.

- Graham

* ************************************************************************ *

This transmission is intended for the named recipient only. It may contain 
private and confidential information. If this has come to you in error you must 
not act on anything disclosed in it, nor must you copy it, modify it, 
disseminate it in any way, or show it to anyone. Please e-mail the sender to 
inform us of the transmission error or telephone ECA International immediately 
and delete the e-mail from your information system.

Telephone numbers for ECA International offices are: Sydney +61 (0)2 8272 5300, 
Hong Kong + 852 2121 2388, London +44 (0)20 7351 5000 and New York +1 212 582 

* ************************************************************************ *

reply via email to

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