Re: an LM update

[Carl D. Sorensen]

On 3/23/09 8:19 AM, "Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> wrote:

> 
> 
> James E. Bailey wrote March 23, 2009 12:43 PM
>> 
>> Am 23.03.2009 um 13:24 schrieb Trevor Daniels:
>> 
>> I'd like to say that I think removing polyphony here is a viable
>> solution, but I don't really believe that. Vocal music is heavily
>> reliant on this single staff polyphony.   It's far too important
>> and  often-used concept to really not introduce in the Learning
>> Manual.
> 
> Personally I'd prefer to either remove it, or replace it with
> something like, "The concepts required to write polyphony
> are not introduced until section 3.2."  And of course fix 3.2.
> 

I vote for this as well.  I think in the Learning Manual we should be firm
on the policy of not introducing unexplained syntax.

It should be sufficient to give a pointer that says "we'll cover this later.
Hang on till we get there".  Then fix 3.2

Carl