Doc: add a note about \relative f to notation (issue 1909)

Doc: add a note about \relative f to notation

[janek, 2011-09-21 07:20:46]

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2011-09/msg00331.html


http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1909

[dak, 2011-09-21 07:50:04]

http://codereview.appspot.com/5096046/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.i...
File Documentation/notation/pitches.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/5096046/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.i...
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:258: If you carefully consider all the
rules above and remember that the
Probably a bit too contorted in the beginning.

Just "One consequence of these rules is that" would be quite more concise,
decreasing the chances of the reader falling asleep before he gets to the
conclusion.

Graham's warning against complex language was quite valid; the "monosyllabic"
version in the mail exchange a definite improvement.  The levity of language
makes it fit less well with a reference manual, though.  Cutting down the
starting sentence of the version quoted here seems still prudent.

[pkx166h, 2011-09-21 09:51:09]

Suggestion to text.

http://codereview.appspot.com/5096046/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.i...
File Documentation/notation/pitches.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/5096046/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.i...
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:263: 
Janek, something 'like' this:

Absolute pitch disregards accidentals which means that the first note inside
@code{@w{\relative f}} is interpreted as if it was written in absolute pitch
mode.

[dak, 2011-09-21 10:36:37]

pkx166h@gmail.com writes:

> Suggestion to text.
>
>
>
http://codereview.appspot.com/5096046/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.i...
> File Documentation/notation/pitches.itely (right):
>
>
http://codereview.appspot.com/5096046/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.i...
> Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:263:
> Janek, something 'like' this:
>
> Absolute pitch disregards accidentals

Uh what?  I really think we are better off not trying to add an
"explanation" that will be harder to make sense from than the resulting
behavior.

> which means that the first note inside @code{@w{\relative f}} is
> interpreted as if it was written in absolute pitch mode.
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/5096046/
>
>

-- 
David Kastrup

[Graham Percival (old account), 2011-09-21 19:31:29]

http://codereview.appspot.com/5096046/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.i...
File Documentation/notation/pitches.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/5096046/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.i...
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:258: If you carefully consider all the
rules above and remember that the
On 2011/09/21 07:50:05, dak wrote:
> Just "One consequence of these rules is that" would be quite more concise,

+1

> Graham's warning against complex language was quite valid; the "monosyllabic"
> version in the mail exchange a definite improvement.

I'm not as concerned about monosyllabic words in Notation as I am about
Learning, but it's still good to avoid them.  Quite apart from putting (some)
native English readers to sleep, those words are harder for non-native English
speakers to read.

http://codereview.appspot.com/5096046/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.i...
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:263: 
On 2011/09/21 09:51:09, J_lowe wrote:
> Janek, something 'like' this:
> 
> Absolute pitch disregards accidentals

hmm, I agree with David here -- mentioning accidentals only confuses the issue.

[janek, 2011-09-25 17:43:37]

I've made this briefer according to your suggestions.

beers,
Janek

http://codereview.appspot.com/5096046/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.i...
File Documentation/notation/pitches.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/5096046/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.i...
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:258: If you carefully consider all the
rules above and remember that the
On 2011/09/21 07:50:05, dak wrote:
> Probably a bit too contorted in the beginning.
> 
> Just "One consequence of these rules is that" would be quite more concise,
> decreasing the chances of the reader falling asleep before he gets to the
> conclusion.
> 
> Graham's warning against complex language was quite valid; the "monosyllabic"
> version in the mail exchange a definite improvement.  The levity of language
> makes it fit less well with a reference manual, though.  Cutting down the
> starting sentence of the version quoted here seems still prudent.

Done.

[dak, 2011-09-25 21:40:29]

LGTM

[Graham Percival (old account), 2011-09-26 05:26:14]

LGTM.  If you wanted to add a @lilypond to make it more visible, I'm happy with
that, otherwise just go ahead and push.

[janek, 2011-09-26 10:32:43]

2011/9/26  <percival.music.ca@gmail.com>:
> LGTM.  If you wanted to add a @lilypond to make it more visible, I'm
> happy with that, otherwise just go ahead and push.

pushed 0d4c0b0979c200e54cffc6b68671df50d6b90a49

I've accidentally created a new branch 'relativef' in savannah
repository - sorry for that, it was a typo.  I've deleted it already.

cheers,
Janek