Doc: improve 2.10 World music

Doc: improve 2.10 World music

* Move Turkish note names table in the relevant subsection;
* Add glossary entries (with stubs)
* Add @seealso whereever possible
* Improve wording, consistency.

[Valentin Villenave, 2010-11-01 11:20:54]

Hi everybody,

here's a patch that will make Trevor happy: no more "musics"! :-)

Please have a look; I am currently building the docs to make sure that it
doesn't break anything, but I'm hopeful.

Cheers.

[Graham Percival (old account), 2010-11-01 15:22:13]

http://codereview.appspot.com/2732043/diff/3001/Documentation/music-glossary....
File Documentation/music-glossary.tely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/2732043/diff/3001/Documentation/music-glossary....
Documentation/music-glossary.tely:8765: @node Non-Western terms A-Z
Somebody might object that we're codifying "non-western" instead of "non-common
practice period".  I personally don't care one way or the other.

If /you/ care, or at least want to be polite to people who /do/ care, then I
propose that you open a fluffy debate on -user about these terms.  If you just
want to get stuff done, then ignore the whole thing and just use "non-western
terms", and blame me for telling you to get stuff done if anybody objects.

http://codereview.appspot.com/2732043/diff/3001/Documentation/notation/world....
File Documentation/notation/world.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/2732043/diff/3001/Documentation/notation/world....
Documentation/notation/world.itely:25: @node Non-Western notation and tuning
systems
Technically, this should be "Common notation for non-Western music".  Then
within that subsection, you'd have an "@unnumberedsubsubsec Non-Western tuning
systems"

[Trevor Daniels, 2010-11-01 16:41:15]

> here's a patch that will make Trevor happy: no
> more "musics"! :-)

:)

Looks pretty good to me, apart from a couple of minor rephrasings.

http://codereview.appspot.com/2732043/diff/3001/Documentation/notation/world....
File Documentation/notation/world.itely (left):

http://codereview.appspot.com/2732043/diff/3001/Documentation/notation/world....
Documentation/notation/world.itely:348: automatic beaming and beaming the notes
manually.  Where matching
"The alternative is to switch off automatic beaming and beam the notes
manually."  ["one" is rarely used today, other than in caricatures of royalty.]

http://codereview.appspot.com/2732043/diff/3001/Documentation/notation/world....
Documentation/notation/world.itely:350: adjust the beaming behaviour and/or use
compound time signatures.
"Even if a match to existing typeset music is not required it may still be
desirable to adjust the beaming behaviour and/or use compound time signatures."

[Valentin Villenave, 2010-11-01 17:26:20]

OK, new patch set.

On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 4:22 PM,  <percival.music.ca@gmail.com> wrote:
> Somebody might object that we're codifying "non-western" instead of
> "non-common practice period".  I personally don't care one way or the
> other.

I do. Hans has a point in saying that "non-Western" isn't quite
appropriate; however there's no way we'll start putting acronyms in
section titles ("non-CPP"), and "Common Practice Period" is just too
long and confusing.

What I really really dislike is "World music". However I never
objected or made a fuss about it, because I realize we need to give
this section a title, and it has to be short and easy-to-get, no
matter how obnoxious and crypto-colonialist it may otherwise sound.

> Technically, this should be "Common notation for non-Western music".
> Then within that subsection, you'd have an "@unnumberedsubsubsec
> Non-Western tuning systems"

Oh, that was what I've been looking for without realizing it! Indeed,
it will make things much more consistent.

On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 5:41 PM,  <tdanielsmusic@googlemail.com> wrote:
> ["one" is rarely used today, other than in caricatures of royalty.]

Oh, really? Then we are not amused.

> "Even if a match to existing typeset music is not required it may still
> be desirable to adjust the beaming behaviour and/or use compound time
> signatures."

I've added "*automatic* beaming behaviour, as it makes a lot more sense to me.

And now, how GTY does it L? :-)

Valentin.

[Trevor Daniels, 2010-11-01 18:22:49]

LGTM.  Thanks!