Re: review new info on file layout

[Graham Percival]

On 4-Feb-06, at 1:59 AM, Mats Bengtsson wrote:

> Quoting Erik Sandberg <address@hidden>:
> > Then I'd propose this instead:
> > \new Lyrics { \lyricsto mytune { ... } }
> > because it feels relevant to me to consequently create contexts as 
> > top-level
> > as possible. (hm.. the outer {} in my example are still confusing 
> > though,
> > since lyricsto never can be part of anything sequential)

I agree with Erik -- now the highest view of the music expression is
{
  \new Staff { vocal }
  \new Lyrics \lyricsto vocalstaff { \lyrics }
  \new PianoStaff
}

correct?  And I should change the vocal templates to match this?

> The intuitive idea behind my proposal is that the second argument
> of the \lyricsto construct is the Lyrics context, whereas with your
> proposal it's only the lyrics expression. Of course, there might be
> situations where you have several \lyricsto within the same Lyrics
> context, so then your proposal makes more sense. However, in such
> situations, I would normally use something like:
> \lyricsto partI \context Lyrics = lyr {...}
> \lyricsto partII \context Lyrics = lyr {...}
> \lyricsto partIII \context Lyrics = lyr {...}

Recall that this is an example for newbies (unless you two have moved 
on to talking about general lily syntax by now :).  If somebody wants 
to do complicated stuff, they can read chapter 7 of the manual, instead 
of just chapters 3 and 4.  :)

> > I think the shorthand without score is highly relevant:
> > - Lots of music is just short snippets. See e.g. regression tests, 
> > LSR and bug archive.
>
> That's only true for the small group of people like you and me who
> spend more time answering mailing list questions and handling bug
> reports than on typesetting any real music. It's clearly a 
> suboptimization
> to adapt the syntax too much to such unnormal use of the program.

Yes, but it also applies to the manual.  We already explain that 
examples from the manual need {} or even \relative c' { }   to compile.

> I agree that we shouldn't force people to remember lots of extra 
> syntax that the program itself can figure out. However, I've seen lots 
> of confusion on the mailing list because \score
> is now optional.

Hopefully this confusion will be lessened with the new chapter 4.  I 
may revisit the tutorial with this in mind, too.

- Graham