Re: finished second draft?

[Mats Bengtsson]

Carl D. Sorensen wrote:
> Perhaps it
> would be clearer if we started with single-staff polyphony with named and
> explicitly created voices, along with the \voiceOne through \voiceFour
> properties.
>
> We could then introduce the << \\ >> syntax as a simple way to handle music
> where we don't care that temporary voices are created and then discarded.
>
> It seems to me to be much easier to go from the full understanding to the
> shortcut than the other way around.  But that could be just how I think.
>   
With the risking of sounding negative, I'm not sure I agree. The <<{...} 
\\ {...}>> feature
is so much easier to teach and use (at least at a basic level), whereas 
the explicit creation of
contexts is much more involved. We have lots of users who have survived 
well for several
years using the <<{...} \\ {...} >> feature. Of course, once they hit 
the beaming problem or
lyrics problem, they have to struggle a bit, but then they are already 
more mature LilyPond
users and perhaps better prepared to realize what it's all about and to 
take the struggle.
Seriously, how many of you had a "full understanding" of the explicit 
context creation
one year ago?
I would propose to still introduce the <<{...} \\ {...} >> feature 
first, but with some bells
and whistles saying that you might get problems together with lyrics and 
automatic beaming
and telling where to look at that time.

We use the same strategy when introducing the short-hand
\relative c'{ c d e f g a b c }
before the full explicit creation of all contexts:
\score{
 \new Staff{
   \new Voice{
     \relative c'{
       c d e f g a b c
     }
   }
 }
}

   /Mats