Doc: writing music events to a .notes file.

Doc: writing music events to a .notes file.

[Reinhold, 2011-04-19 11:33:32]

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.ite...
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2386: The syntax is a tab-delimited line,
with at two fixed fields on
... with at least two ...

("least" missing?)

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.ite...
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2394: python.  This can be very useful for
researchers wishing to
... such as python scripts.

[pkx166h, 2011-04-19 11:36:41]

minor stuff, one missing word.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.ite...
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2329: Displaying a music expression in
LilyPond notation can be
is the word 'notation' redundant?

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.ite...
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2358: See @rextend{Displaying music
expressions}.
Would this be better as an @seealso? I am guessing there is some more 'stuff' to
go in here else is there a need for an @node just for this?

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.ite...
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2374: be jumbled together in the same file. 
The output looks like this:
is 'jumble' appropriate for non-English Speakers - suggest 'mixed'. :)

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.ite...
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2386: The syntax is a tab-delimited line,
with at two fixed fields on
missing word I think 
...with at *least* two fixed fields... (?)

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.ite...
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2394: python.  This can be very useful for
researchers wishing to
too many 'This.. This...' run on the sentence thus:

...such as python, and can be ...

[Graham Percival (old account), 2011-04-19 12:15:23]

thanks, updated.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.ite...
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2329: Displaying a music expression in
LilyPond notation can be
On 2011/04/19 11:36:41, J_lowe wrote:
> is the word 'notation' redundant?

I don't think so -- the point is that you'll see a music expression in that
particular format, rather than seeing the music expression written in scheme. 
What's the format?  "lilypond notation".

(note that this part is just a copy&paste, not any new material that I wrote)

I'm certainly open to fixing it if this part is unclear, though.  Hmm... what
about "LilyPond input notation" ?

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.ite...
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2358: See @rextend{Displaying music
expressions}.
On 2011/04/19 11:36:41, J_lowe wrote:
> Would this be better as an @seealso? I am guessing there is some more 'stuff'
to
> go in here else is there a need for an @node just for this?

Dunno.  One option would be to move the material from scheme-tutorial into this
particular spot, but then that section would just be a ref as well.

I figure that if we're going to have a node that's just a ref, it might as well
be here, since the actual material is very scheme-heavy.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.ite...
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2374: be jumbled together in the same file. 
The output looks like this:
On 2011/04/19 11:36:41, J_lowe wrote:
> is 'jumble' appropriate for non-English Speakers - suggest 'mixed'. :)

done.  :)

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.ite...
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2386: The syntax is a tab-delimited line,
with at two fixed fields on
On 2011/04/19 11:36:41, J_lowe wrote:
> missing word I think 
> ...with at *least* two fixed fields... (?)

Thanks, I removed the "at".  "... with two fixed fields on each line...".

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/1/Documentation/notation/input.ite...
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2394: python.  This can be very useful for
researchers wishing to
On 2011/04/19 11:36:41, J_lowe wrote:
> too many 'This.. This...' run on the sentence thus:
> 
> ...such as python, and can be ...

thanks, done.

[pkx166h, 2011-04-19 13:38:29]

LGTM thanks.

[Trevor Daniels, 2011-04-19 16:06:48]

LGTM, apart from a couple of nitpicks.

Trevor

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/2002/Documentation/notation/input....
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/2002/Documentation/notation/input....
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2373: you have multiple unnamed staffs, the
events for all staffs will
Didn't we agree to use staves as the plural?  I can't remember.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/2002/Documentation/notation/input....
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2402: @qq{proof of concept}.  If it does not
cover some event(s) that
If some events that you want to see are not included, ...
[I guess using 2nd person here is clearer.]

[Graham Percival (old account), 2011-04-20 18:55:01]

thanks, updated.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/2002/Documentation/notation/input....
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/2002/Documentation/notation/input....
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2373: you have multiple unnamed staffs, the
events for all staffs will
On 2011/04/19 16:06:48, Trevor Daniels wrote:
> Didn't we agree to use staves as the plural?  I can't remember.

I specifically thought of that discussion, but I mis-remembered the result. 
Thanks, fixed.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4438054/diff/2002/Documentation/notation/input....
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2402: @qq{proof of concept}.  If it does not
cover some event(s) that
On 2011/04/19 16:06:48, Trevor Daniels wrote:
> If some events that you want to see are not included, ...

Thanks, fixed.

> [I guess using 2nd person here is clearer.]

I thought so.  Plus, we relax the rules for @knownissues anyway -- I know that
the doc policy says not to use "you", but I didn't see the point in spending
minutes thinking of ways to rewrite a sentence in the @knownissues.

[Graham Percival (old account), 2011-06-08 19:10:01]

thanks, pushed.