[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Notation Reference 1.8 "Text" : ready for review

From: Valentin Villenave
Subject: Re: Notation Reference 1.8 "Text" : ready for review
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2008 22:44:27 +0200

2008/10/3 Graham Percival <address@hidden>:
> Be afraid.  Be very afraid.  :)

I am. Why do you think it took me eight months to complete this section? :-)

> - inspirational headword only uses \italics.  Boring.  (yeah, I
>  know it fits the theme of Beethoven stuff, but since NR 2
> doesn't always follow it, we might want a sexier headword for Text)

I'll ask Trevor B.

> - the syntax for text spanners is a maoing disaster.
>  #'bound-details #'left #'text?!  You've got to be kidding me.

I do agree.

> It would be totally awesome if
>  \startTextSpan #"foo"
> set up the \override.

I do use such a function in my opera. If you ask nicely, I *may*
propose a patch someday :-)

> - final sentence of main text in Text marks:
> When specified at the beginning of a score or at a line break,
> marks will be printed at the beginning of the line (the next line,
> in case of a line break).
>  change to:
> When specified at the a line break, the mark will be printed at
> the beginning of the next line.

"When specified at the a line break"?? You may want to read what you
copy/paste sometimes :)

OK, updated.

>  we already know what happens at the beginning of a score, and
> that sentence is too complicated.  As a general rule, be
> suspicious if you use both parentheses and commas (in a single
> sentence).

In general, I totally prefer, you know, to use commas like, you know, sparingly.

>  [sic], of course.  :)

Yeah, you often make me "sic" :)

> Also consider whether you should use "system" instead of "line".

Well, in this particular case the use of "line" was implied by "line
break". I could change this into "system break", but now we don't want
users to think we'll cause a system failure on their computer, do we?

> Actually, I'd make this a general note for policy.txt: use
> "system" instead of "line".  The term "line" could refer to a
> musical voice, a system, or a literal line.  I'd therefore avoid
> it unless I was talking about an actual line -- say, "a text
> spanner creates a dotted line".

I agree with using "system" iso "line" (that's one of these things I
tell my pupils every week). But I kind of prefer "line break" over
"system break".

> - Separate text: kill the "word processor" thing.  At most, you
>  could say that you were using LilyPond as a text typesetter.

We've already had that argument one year ago. Back then, I went to and found that LilyPond
hardly lacks anything you can expect from a non-WYSIWYG word
processor. (Besides, I definitely regard this as a killer-feature.)

> Also, what do you mean by "using a specific syntax"? (same
> paragraph)

\markuplines syntax. The next sentence precisely explains what I mean:
"This syntax is described in Multi-page markup. "

And if you're wondering why the link looks buried at the end of the
paragraph, that is because of some stupid policy rule (don't know who
the hell invented it) that requires to put references at the end of
paragraphs :-)

> What does \markuplines do?  If it's not obvious (ie not \slurUp),
> we need an example in the main text.

Do you mean an @example? The same @example you explicitly forbid? :-)

I was tempted to have a markuplines @lilypond block here, but I
couldn't figure out how to print a multi-page snippet image.

Besides, once again, clicking on "Multi-page markup" is obvious enough
to know more about it.

> - 1.8.2 Formatting Text - text markup introduction:
> This syntax even allows to print double quotation marks, by
> preceding them with backslashes.
>  change to
> Double quotation marks may be printed by preceding them with
> backslashes.


> Are there any other characters that need to be escaped?  What
> about {} ?  IIRC there used to be a list of such symbols... but
> maybe that was somewhere in Vocal music.  Anyway, if {} need
> escaping, that should be mentioned in this paragraph.

Nope. {} does not need to be escaped but to be enclosed in double
quotation marks. RTFNR1.8.2 :)

> I'm still not wild about the
>  d_\markup \italic "... prints \"italic\" letters!"
> without {} following the \markup.  I think it's a good habit to
> get into, and the manual should reinforce good habits.  The first
> example on this page already shows that it's possible to omit the
> {}, with the \markp intenso.


> I don't understand the point of two \center-column examples.  Why
> is the first one in there?  mentioning Text alignment here isn't
> worth it; people will get to that material on their own.  Kill it;


> the three \center-column example shows the point of quotes and
> \line.


> That said, the second example needs one more line:
> c1^\markup { \center-column { a "bbb c" } }


> Why the IR to TextScript?  AFAIK, there's nothing particular to
> TextScript here; either add TextSpanner and RehearsalMark, or
> remove the TextScript link.


> - Selecting font size: why the mao aren't these examples in
>  \relative c' ?!  Ugly, ugly!

Actually, they are; braces were just left from my editor. Removed.

> Change:
> . the font size can be defined to an absolute value,
> . predefined commands allow to easily select standard sizes,
>  to:
> . the font size can be set to standard sizes,
> . the font size can be set to an absolute value,


> Change the order of the example as well -- \large is easier to
> understand than \fontsize #5, so do it first.  Also, add two more
> examples for the \fontsize stuff, and make the indentation match
> the other two \markup{ ... } commands.


> "alternate font families", second sentence: change the colon to a
> period to split it into two sentences.


> _New dynamic marks_ and _Manual repeat marks_.: no punctuation
> after the first @ref{}.  Remember that we can't do that.

?? There are commas. Look twice.

> @predef: missing \smaller and \larger.

Indeed. One of these days, someone will have to tell me why the frak
we have been keeping both \larger and \bigger, that do exactly the
same. I'd vote for removing \bigger before 2.12.

> That's as far as I got before I got bored.

Nice way of admitting you couldn't find anything else since everything
was perfect from there :)


reply via email to

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