Re: GDP: NR 1.1 Pitches

[Mats Bengtsson]

A few comments:

- In "Relative octave entry", I would reorder the items in the itemized 
list and
 move the first item last (or at least below the currently second 
item), since
 the other items explain the concept of "relative to ..." which is 
mentioned in the
 first item.
 Also, in the (currently) last item, I would start the last sentence 
with "For example
 '' and ,, will alter the ...".

- In Accidentals, I wouldn't refer to "Nordic and Germanic languages", 
since both Swedish,
 Danish, Norwegian and German use "-iss" and "-ess" (admittedly the 
same concept, but
 a different spelling). I just noticed that this is wrong also in the 
Glossary, don't
 understand how that information has survived so many years. The 
spelling with
 a single "s", I've only seen in Dutch so we are very lucky that 
Han-Wen and Jan
 were dutch, since it saves typing.

- In "Transpose" at the end of the text describing how to handle 
transposing instruments,
 I would replace "would" with "could" in "... you would wrap the 
existing music ..."
 since this is just one alternative. You could off course also get the 
same result with a
 single \transpose command, such as
\transpose f bes \musicInBflat
 I like the current example, though, since it shows how to wrap things 
together.

- The example with neutraliseMusic doesn't seem to work, right?

- In "Clef", the text on "These same clef symbols are used in different 
positions on
 the staff to change the ..." seems more appropriate in a music theory 
treatise than
 here, but maybe it doesn't hurt to include it as long as a competent 
musician doesn't
 get offended by the trivial information.

- In Clef, there's a "% Begin verbatim" shown in the HTML output, which 
probably
 shouldn't be there. Also, isn't it too much redundancy in "by setting 
the explicitClefVisibility Staff property to the value | 
end-of-line-invisible: \set Staff.explicitClefVisibility = 
#end-of-line-invisible"?

|- In the final example of "Clef", there's something fishy with the line 
breaks. The
 text refers to "the second line" and there is a \break command in the 
code shown,
 still we only see a single score line in the typeset example.

- In "Key signature", the explanation of keySignature is wrong. One 
alternative is to
 write:
"... The format of this command is a list: |
\set Staff.keySignature = #'(((octave . step) . alter) ||((octave . 
step) . alter) ...)| where, ..."
 However, if we compare to the information in the IR, we see that this 
does not tell the
 full story. For each item in the list, you can also use the 
alternative format (step . alter)
 which specifies that the same alteration should hold in all octaves.

- In "Instrument transpositions", it should be clarified already in the 
first sentence that
 this only relates to scores where not all parts are typeset in concert 
pitch. Also, you
 shouldn't have to read half a page to realize that it only influences 
MIDI output and
 que notes. Finally, I guess it would make sense to cite this section 
from "Transpose".

- In "Ambitus", the last example (ambiti-multiple-voices.ly) seems like 
bogus to me.
 A relevant use of X-offset is shown already in the second example of 
the section.
 In the last example, the setting does not influence the result at all, 
since the setting is
 done in the Voice context whereas   the engraver is in the Staff 
context. Also, there's
 no point in removing the engravers from the Voice context (where they 
don't exist by
 default).

- In "Note heads", why not move the subsection "Special noteheads" first?
 (Is it "noteheads" or "note heads"?) since, at least to me, it seems much
 less exotic than the other subsections.

   /Mats

Graham Percival wrote:
> I'm still seeking comments on NR 1.1 Pitches.  As far as I know,
> only one advanced user has read the whole thing in the past month.
> If you read it and didn't see any problems, please let me know.
>
> View it here (and not on lilypond.org!)
> http://web.uvic.ca/~gperciva/
>
> A pdf is available.  The section is 24 pages; if you prefer
> viewing documentation on paper, then please consider printing it
> out.  You could read it on a bus/subway, under the table during a
> boring business meeting, or even during an orchestra rehearsal
> while the conductor fixes mistakes in the viola section.  Unless
> you play viola, of course.
>
>
> I know you're all sick of me asking for comments about this
> section, but it's important to catch mistakes before people start
> translating -- if we discover mistakes after the translations are
> done, we need to update documents in every language, instead of
> just the English docs.
>
> Also, this is the first part of the NR to be updated.  The rest of
> the NR will follow the layout of 1.1 Pitches.  If there's any
> problems with the layout / formatting, then I *really* want to
> know now, before we edit the rest of the docs to match this
> formatting.
>
>
> Here is the current TODO list; don't report any issues which are
> already on this list.
>
> MINOR ISSUES
>
> - headword could be improved (line-break)
> - some minor formatting issues with included LSR stuff.
>
>
> POSTPONED  (ie after GDP is over)
>
> Note names in other languages:
> - table formatting 
> - pitches in Turkish Maquam and other microtonal systems?
>
>
> Cheers,
> - Graham
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>   

--
=============================================
        Mats Bengtsson
        Signal Processing
        Signals, Sensors and Systems
        Royal Institute of Technology
        SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
        Sweden
        Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463                         
       Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
        Email: address@hidden
        WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=============================================