lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

## Re: Doc: NR Added new node for Custom Footnotes (issue 5315053)

 From: pkx166h Subject: Re: Doc: NR Added new node for Custom Footnotes (issue 5315053) Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 23:10:43 +0000

This still needs work but I need some decisions err.. decided and some
more input from Mike.

James

http://codereview.appspot.com/5315053/diff/14001/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/5315053/diff/14001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode1032
Documentation/notation/input.itely:1032: Automatic footnotes create
default superscript numbers which flag the
On 2011/11/02 08:17:42, Graham Percival wrote:
Is the term "flag" often used to refer to footnote numbers?

Actually there is no consensus on this term after doing some research.

This seems
confusing to me; quite apart from musical confusion about not flags,
I'm simply
not familiar with that use of the term as a native English speaker.

Can you say this simpler?  Maybe using "symbol"?  "automatic footnotes
create
symbols (generally numbers) which indicate relevant footnote; manual
footnotes
allow a custom symbol to be used isntead."

I prefer 'indicator' in this case I think. Symbol doesn't denote a
'number' as opposed to say a '\char' (where that \char could be a
'dagger' or 'asterix' or some other customer 'pictogram'.

http://codereview.appspot.com/5315053/diff/14001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode1049
Documentation/notation/input.itely:1049: @qq{bottom left} and @qq{top
right} of the grob respectively.
On 2011/11/02 09:34:12, MikeSol wrote:
On 2011/11/02 08:17:42, Graham Percival wrote:
> lolwut ?  why didn't Mike just pick one value (either the center or
top-left
> corner) and stick with it?!
>
> this is unnecessarily confusing.

The Balloon grob has been like this ever since it has existed in
LilyPond, and
footnote just uses the balloon print function.  I actually like the
way this
works, as it allows the footnote to be aligned to any corner or edge
of the grob
(not unlike ly:stencil-combine-at-edge).

So that's my reasoning.  But the question "why didn't Mike..." should
be
addressed to Han-Wen: as he was the one who created it, he may have
answers that
I don't.

I've left this for now.

http://codereview.appspot.com/5315053/diff/14001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode1059
Documentation/notation/input.itely:1059: To annotate chorded notes;
On 2011/11/02 08:17:42, Graham Percival wrote:
full colon : not semicolon.

Done.

And are chorded notes really the easiest thing to
describe?  What about just doing
a4-\autoFootnote #'(0 . 0) "A note"
first, and _then_ breaking out the complicated stuff?

(and yes, I deliberately chose a4 instead of the more usual c4)

also, in your overview you stated that the command comes *before* the
grob, but
in this case the footnote command seems to come after ?

I guess because we are not indicating a grob i.e.

c-\autoFootnote #'(1 . -1.25)

vs

\autoFootnote #'NoteHead #'(1 . -1.25)
c4

Which does the same thing.

Mike any comment on this?

It seems to infer, now that Graham has phrased it like this, that note
head grobs in this case are 'assumed' and not needed to be specified
like a slur or beam grob etc.

http://codereview.appspot.com/5315053/diff/14001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode1132
Documentation/notation/input.itely:1132: \footnote \super 1 \italic "1.
Little"
On 2011/11/02 08:17:42, Graham Percival wrote:
I'm lost.  it'd probably be easier to understand if I saw the
graphical output
as well, but don't forget that we have blind users.

I want a simple example.
@lilypond
\book{
\relative c' {
a4-\customFootnote "a note"
}
}
or whatever the syntax is.

OK but this is for top-level \markup (I don't think we call it anything
else do we?) and not for notes or anything in the staff. So I've
simplified the markup to just a single string that has one footnote.

The music underneath gives it context but also is the same music
expression that I move on to in the next example to show how to footnote
all the 'other' non top-level markup. So I was trying to keep it
consistent.

The most simple example I suppose is

\book {
\markup {
\bold \italic { Andante }
\footnote \super 1 "1. At walking pace"
}
}

But I thought that looked silly just like that as a printed example.
Hence the extra music expression at the end.

Simple, working, @lilypond[]s.  That's what I'm missing here.

I can remove the music expression completely if you think it will still
work, and just have the \book { \markup { } } construction.

http://codereview.appspot.com/5315053/

reply via email to

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