Re: Clarify notation for slurs and beams (issue 343060043 by address@hidden)

[Carl . D . Sorensen]

Harm,

Thanks for the input.  I'm not sure I agree with you on all this, but
I'm certainly open to being convinced.  I've got specific replies to
your inline comments.


https://codereview.appspot.com/343060043/diff/40001/Documentation/learning/fundamental.itely
File Documentation/learning/fundamental.itely (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/343060043/diff/40001/Documentation/learning/fundamental.itely#newcode465
Documentation/learning/fundamental.itely:465: optionally followed by one
or more post-events.  Post-events add
On 2018/04/30 21:49:37, thomasmorley651 wrote:
> I'd completely delete 'post-event'.
>  From a musical thinking it makes no sense. An articulation is not
performed
> _after_ the note.
> To explain it programmatical, this is not the right place, imho.

> Why not simply:

> "A note entry in LilyPond consists of a pitch, followed by a duration,
> optionally followed by things such as articulations, fingerings,
string numbers,
> slurs, ties, explanatory text, etc."

We could do this.  But ultimately all the things that attach to notes
like this are called post-events in the internals reference.  So I don't
think it's a bad idea to introduce the LilyPond term here, just like we
do for pitch and duration.  All three terms (pitch, duration,
post-event) are LilyPond terms, not musical terms.

We aren't explaining music in this section.  We are explaining LilyPond
constructs.

https://codereview.appspot.com/343060043/diff/40001/Documentation/learning/fundamental.itely#newcode481
Documentation/learning/fundamental.itely:481: Post-events follow the
note to which they are attached.  Suppose we
On 2018/04/30 21:49:37, thomasmorley651 wrote:

> Here as well.

> Also, I think it's important to drop a sentence about the "-"-signs,
which
> actually attach those optional elements to the note.

> So my suggestion:

> "Optional elements are added at the end of the initial
note-duration-entry.
> Probably using a "-"-sign, which can be omitted, if no ambiguity
occurs.
> Suppose we ..."



I don't think I agree that things are attached with "-" signs.  For
example, \staccato, \mordent, \turn, \fermata, \prall, (, [. None of
these are attached with "-" signs, although they can have a direction
indicator (-, _ , ^) preceding them if desired.  At least, that is what
the N.R. 5.4.2 says.

If we want to talk about direction indicators here, I think we can give
a brief introduction.  If not, I think we should leave them out
completely.  In the LM and the NR, the direction indicators are always
included when we add the post-events, if they are needed.

https://codereview.appspot.com/343060043/diff/40001/Documentation/learning/fundamental.itely#newcode488
Documentation/learning/fundamental.itely:488: {c'8-1--(~^\markup{"text
annotation"} c' d')}
On 2018/04/30 21:49:37, thomasmorley651 wrote:

> For the sake of simplicity I'd not use direction-modifiers and enter
the text
> without explicit \markup, i.e.:
> {c'8-1--(~-"text annotation" c' d')}

I think it's actually nicer not to have so many "-" characters; they
make it confusing, in my opinion.

https://codereview.appspot.com/343060043/