Re: GDP: NR Specification

[Graham Percival]

Eyolf Østrem wrote:
> On 08.11.2007 (15:44), Graham Percival wrote:
> >  Based on the recent discussions, what should change in the written policy?
>
> I'd say: the following sentence:
>
> >  However, they should be familiar with the material in the Learning
> >  Manual (particularly ``Fundamental Concepts''), so do not repeat
> >  that material in this book.  Also, you should assume that users

Huh.  On first reading, that looks exactly opposite of what I intended
to say...

... oh wait, I remember now!  I was trying to say "don't explain that
{}() don't need to be nested... or that you can make a \new Staff{}
wherever you want... or that you can define variables ... etc".

> Fundamental concepts should be explained in the NR also, but in a different
> style than in the LM: in the NR in a precise, technical man page-like way,
> in the LM in a tutorial style. There should not be *information* in the LM
> which is not also available from the NR, it should just be presented
> differently.

Agreed... ok, I guess I'd better do this sooner rather than later.  I'll
add a NR 3 that discusses the same stuff as LM 2-3.  Then the policy can
 say "assume that readers are familiar with the material in NR 3".

It might seem a bit weird to assume that people know NR 3 when they're
reading NR 1, but I think we should start the NR with notation stuff,
not basic "lilypond is whitespace-insensitive"-type stuff.

Cheers.
- Graham