Re: NR 2.1 Vocal music

[Graham Percival]

On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 09:15:26AM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
> 
> Graham Percival wrote Friday, August 27, 2010 9:54 PM
> 
> >- do you absolutely need to use an @example rather than @lilypond
> >for
> >the page-separator-markup ?
> >That said, we really try to avoid repeating information that's
> >elsewhere.  Unfortunately, the current doc page about
> >page-separator-markup is rather un-optimal.
> >If this were GDP, I'd run off and fix this by making a separate
> >section right away, but for now I'll simply state it as a problem.
> 
> For now I've added an @lilypond, the smallest I
> could devise that was realistic.  Is this OK?
> (Note it overwrites the \paper block)

Hmm... I'm not certain about the paper-size and indent.
Particularly about the 'landscape bit.

That said, I'm not certain that we *don't* want that stuff,
either -- I haven't (yet) checked to see how it looks if you
remove it.  The current example extends beyond the (normal)
right-hand margin, though, so I'm not wild about it.

Oh, and I don't like the \book, either.

What about:

\score {
  {
    c4 c c c
    \break
    c4 c c c
  }
  \paper {
    system-separator-markup = \slashSeparator
  }
}

Is that example missing anything important?  I suppose it might be
nice to add a StaffGroup in there rarther than only having a
single staff... but I think this gets to the heart of the matter.

NB: I'm thinking of a general NR 1.6.1 section here (see below),
rather than specifically a choral one; that explains the
difference between the ChoirStaff approach and my single-staff
one.

I definitely think that
  c4 c c c
is easier to understand than
  \repeat unfold 8 { c4 }

As with all my "minimal examples", you're totally right that an
experienced lilypond won't be puzzled by the \repeat stuff... but
just yesterday, we had some newbie asking about system separators
(although he didn't know the right term).  I think the extra
simplicity doesn't lose anything, and has the potential to avoid
potential confusion from newbies.


> System separators are only useful in multi-staff
> documents, essentially full orchestral or choral
> scores, so maybe it shouldn't have a section in
> the main text.

NR 1.6 Staff notation?

I mean, system separators are pretty much on par with StaffGroup
-- it's something you add to a (large) score to improve
readability.  I'd totally go for a 1.6.1 Separating staves, to
come at the end fo the current 1.6.1.


> >- can't you do \layout { \context { \dynamicsUp }} ?  After
> >mentioning
> >\dynamicsUp, it feels really weird to see the arcane \override
> >command
> >in there.
> 
> No, it seems predefs are not permitted in \context
> blocks:

Oh yes, another of our bugs that IIRC doesn't have an issue
number.  Could you report it to the Bug Squad, or add it to the
tracker yourself?  (after checking that I Did Recall Correctly,
and that it really isn't in the tracker)

Cheers,
- Graham