[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:27:30 +0100
2008/1/14, Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden>:
> You are greatly exaggerating.
Graham? exagerating? Noooo way... :)
This question is tricky. When I first saw your forwarded mail about
barlines thickness, I was about to add the explanations and
description myself, and then I had a second thought.
Generally speaking, I do not agree with adding the description as comments.
Honestly, I would find it unfair: the whole point in the way examples
are currently integrated in the manual is that source code does NOT
contain vital informations. When it does, it is included verbatim. The
"click-on-the-image-to-see-the-code" thing is more or less
illustrative, and absolutely never ever required to get access to
important stuff. So, let's keep it that way.
In other words, if there is anything to be added, it should be added
in the *actual* documentation.
In this particular case, this is easy: we could just explain more the
logic behind the barlines names, with some short sentences like this
"The "|" character means a thin line, while the dot means a thick
line. If you need to place repeats, you can use the colon character.
These characters can be mixed in several ways: e.g. "|." is the
traditional closing bar line that is usually placed at the end of a
(of course, it's just a draft)
Plus, it would be useful even for "normal" users; speaking of personal
experience, it took me a while, for instance, to understand that the
dot actually meant a thick line.
I would work on it right now, but I think Graham would rather wait for
1.1 to be finished first.
As for creating a "blind" bunch of snippets in the LSR, I fully agree.
It would be absolutely great... only if we make sure it's *very* easy
We must not forget that LilyPond is a fantastic opportunity for
visually impaired users (and it could become even more efficient if we
ever get the Braille and the Festival stuff working). We can't ignore
it, even if so far we have only met a couple of them.
- Re: signs, Graham Percival, 2008/01/14
- Re: signs, Werner LEMBERG, 2008/01/14
- Re: signs,
Valentin Villenave <=
- Re: signs, Graham Percival, 2008/01/16