[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why no review on Doc: NR 1.6.2 - Staff Symbol?
From: |
James |
Subject: |
Re: Why no review on Doc: NR 1.6.2 - Staff Symbol? |
Date: |
Sun, 4 Dec 2011 01:17:47 +0000 |
Hello,
On 3 Dec 2011, at 18:51, Xavier Scheuer <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 3 December 2011 15:56, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>> No doubt about that. Here is an example based on the new documentation:
>>
>> \new StaffGroup
>> <<
>> \new Staff { \grace {d8[ e]} \repeat unfold 20 f1~ }
>> \new Staff { \override Staff.StaffSymbol #'line-count = #3
>> { d4 d d d } \repeat unfold 19 c'1~ }
>>>>
>>
>> Does it work? No. Will the user have an idea how to fix this? No.
>>
>> But
>>
>> \new StaffGroup
>> <<
>> \new Staff { \grace {d8[ e]} \repeat unfold 20 f1~ }
>> \new Staff \with { \override StaffSymbol #'line-count = #3 } {
>> { d4 d d d } \repeat unfold 19 c'1 }
>>>>
>>
>> works just fine. I readily agree that we need to document the use of
>> context modifications better. But removing their use from the
>> documentation where they are the correct tool to use, in particular if
>> the end result does not even compile without change, is not a step in
>> the right direction.
>
> I agree with David here.
>
> There is an other typical example where the use of \with {…} would be
> better, and therefore should be recommended in the doc: when printing
> instrument names.
>
> Experienced users know they'd better use \with {…} but lambda users
> does not know since in the doc on can find both
>
> \set Staff.instrumentName = #"Violin "
>
> and
>
> \new Staff \with {
> instrumentName = #"Bassoon"
> }
>
> and, especially in the relevant section, NR 1.6.3 Writing parts >
> Instrument names, this is not the best one that is used and explained.
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/notation/writing-parts.html
>
> One _must_ use \with {…} to avoid the instrument name _not to be
> printed!_ if a parallel voice starts with a \grace .
>
> This is not an "hypothetical issue", we got at least half a dozen
> messages from users experiencing this "issue" (although they did
> exactly what is said in the documentation) on the French users mailing
> list.
>
> Could you please change the doc, NR 1.6.3 Writing parts > Instrument
> names , accordingly and recommend the use of
>
> \new Staff \with {
> instrumentName = #"Bassoon"
> }
>
> and advise _against_
>
> \set Staff.instrumentName = #"Violin "
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Here is a snippet showing the relevance of this issue (typically what
> a lambda user would encounter).
>
> %%%%
>
> \version "2.15.20"
>
> \score {
> <<
> \new Staff \with {
> instrumentName = #"OK"
> } {
> c'1
> }
> \new Staff \with {
> instrumentName = #"OK"
> } {
> \grace b8 c'1
> }
>>>
> }
>
> \score {
> <<
> \new Staff {
> \set Staff.instrumentName = #"NOT PRINTED!!"
> c'1
> }
> \new Staff {
> \set Staff.instrumentName = #"NOT OK"
> \grace b8 c'1
> }
>>>
> }
>
> %%%%
>
> Cheers,
> Xavier
>
> --
> Xavier Scheuer <address@hidden>
Xavier, could you put in a doc tracker issue?
thanks
James
- Why no review on Doc: NR 1.6.2 - Staff Symbol?, David Kastrup, 2011/12/03
- Re: Why no review on Doc: NR 1.6.2 - Staff Symbol?, Carl Sorensen, 2011/12/03
- Re: Why no review on Doc: NR 1.6.2 - Staff Symbol?, David Kastrup, 2011/12/03
- Re: Why no review on Doc: NR 1.6.2 - Staff Symbol?, Graham Percival, 2011/12/03
- Re: Why no review on Doc: NR 1.6.2 - Staff Symbol?, David Kastrup, 2011/12/04
- Re: Why no review on Doc: NR 1.6.2 - Staff Symbol?, James, 2011/12/04
- Re: Why no review on Doc: NR 1.6.2 - Staff Symbol?, David Kastrup, 2011/12/04
- Re: Why no review on Doc: NR 1.6.2 - Staff Symbol?, Graham Percival, 2011/12/04
- Re: Why no review on Doc: NR 1.6.2 - Staff Symbol?, address@hidden, 2011/12/04
- Re: Why no review on Doc: NR 1.6.2 - Staff Symbol?, David Kastrup, 2011/12/04
- Re: Why no review on Doc: NR 1.6.2 - Staff Symbol?, Graham Percival, 2011/12/05