Make documentation reflect presence of \tuplet

Make documentation reflect presence of \tuplet

This is a followup issue to the changes introduced by issue 3095.

[Keith, 2013-01-29 04:47:13]

Looks great.

You can simplify the version in changes.  The two tuplets sharing share one beam
catches the eye, but that was not the change.  I wrote a version below imagining
a reader who has forgotten that the fraction in \times is backwards, and didn't
yet notice that LilyPond commands can have optional arguments. Use what you
like.

https://codereview.appspot.com/7220052/diff/1/Documentation/changes.tely
File Documentation/changes.tely (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/7220052/diff/1/Documentation/changes.tely#newc...
Documentation/changes.tely:76: 
Tuplets are now created with the @code{\tuplet} command, which takes a fraction
@code{t/n} to specify that @var{t} notes are played in the time usually allowed
for @var{n}. One @code{\tuplet} command can create several tuplets if their
duration is typed after the fraction.
@lilypond[quote,verbatim,relative=2]
\tuplet 3/2 { c8 d e } \tuplet 3/2 { f e d } c2
\tuplet 3/2 4 { c8 d e f e d } c2 
@end lilypond
The @code{\times} command, taking the reverse order in the fraction, still
functions.

[dak, 2013-01-29 09:23:03]

On 2013/01/29 04:47:13, Keith wrote:
> Looks great.
> 
> You can simplify the version in changes.  The two tuplets sharing share one
beam
> catches the eye, but that was not the change.

Right.  This was a cut&paste job from the notation manual where the intent was
to _also_ illustrate that beaming and tuplet bracketing are not necessarily the
same.  But you are quite correct that this particular lesson is not part of the
changes.

> I wrote a version below imagining
> a reader who has forgotten that the fraction in \times is backwards, and
didn't
> yet notice that LilyPond commands can have optional arguments. Use what you
> like.

I'll use a slightly edited version.  It does not make sense to use @code{t/n}
along with @var{t} since @var uses a different font and even uppercasing in info
files.  As a mathematician, I am not really enthused with "reverse order in the
fraction" as a description, but then the whole last sentence warrants rewriting.

If you consider that description better than the original, you might want to
look over the entries in learning and notation.  The original entries for \times
very much focused on explaining things in a way and order that makes the
"fraction order" choice appear less strange.  Rewriting this felt somewhat
awkward, so I might not have arrived at the best solution.

[dak, 2013-01-29 09:46:44]

Adjust Changes along Keith's suggestions

[Keith, 2013-01-29 17:25:19]

> If you consider that description better than the original, 
> you might want to look over the entries in learning and 
> notation.  The original entries for \times very much 
> focused on explaining things in a way and order that 
> makes the "fraction order" choice appear less strange.  

Those looked fine.
I tried to write simpler texts, below.  If you are dissatisfied you can use them
as inspiration.

https://codereview.appspot.com/7220052/diff/4001/Documentation/learning/commo...
File Documentation/learning/common-notation.itely (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/7220052/diff/4001/Documentation/learning/commo...
Documentation/learning/common-notation.itely:506: ratio of the number of notes
to play in relation to the nominal
"... The fraction is the number of notes in the tuplet over the number that
would normally fill the duration of the tuplet. For triplets, ..."

https://codereview.appspot.com/7220052/diff/4001/Documentation/notation/rhyth...
File Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/7220052/diff/4001/Documentation/notation/rhyth...
Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely:192: Tuplets are made from a music
expression by with the
"A tuplet is made from a music expression by multiplying the speed of the music
expression by a fraction:"

https://codereview.appspot.com/7220052/diff/4001/Documentation/notation/rhyth...
Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely:205: the number of notes is 3/2 that of
notes with their written length.
"... the triplet in which 3 notes sound within the duration normally allowed for
2:"

[Jean-Charles, 2013-01-29 18:54:50]

On 2013/01/29 17:25:19, Keith wrote:
> I tried to write simpler texts, below.  If you are dissatisfied you > can use
them as inspiration.
> 

I like this evident wording.

[dak, 2013-01-30 10:41:50]

On 2013/01/29 17:25:19, Keith wrote:

>
https://codereview.appspot.com/7220052/diff/4001/Documentation/learning/commo...
> Documentation/learning/common-notation.itely:506: ratio of the number of notes
> to play in relation to the nominal
> "... The fraction is the number of notes in the tuplet over the number that
> would normally fill the duration of the tuplet. For triplets, ..."

We have a fundamental difference in our terminology.

For you, a triplet consists of three notes.  For me, a triplet consists of a
single note, three of which make up a triplet group.  I have checked our
glossary, and while there is no explicit explanation, "triplets", "quadruplets"
etc are used as a label for a single triplet or quadruplet group, making it more
likely match my usage of the word.  The Wikipedia entry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuplet oscillates between both uses, mathematically
of course a triplet is a group.

The German word is "Triole" and thus made from a different word stem, so
guessing from the equivalence between Germanic languages might be strained.

Still, for now I am going with the usage for which I see a vague preference in
the glossary.  Also note that for something like
\tuplet 3/2 { c4 c8 }, one still talks about triplets, but only two notes are
actually present.

[benko.pal, 2013-01-30 10:54:30]

2013/1/30  <dak@gnu.org>:
> On 2013/01/29 17:25:19, Keith wrote:
>
>
>
https://codereview.appspot.com/7220052/diff/4001/Documentation/learning/commo...
>>
>> Documentation/learning/common-notation.itely:506: ratio of the number
>
> of notes
>>
>> to play in relation to the nominal
>> "... The fraction is the number of notes in the tuplet over the number
>
> that
>>
>> would normally fill the duration of the tuplet. For triplets, ..."
>
>
> We have a fundamental difference in our terminology.
>
> For you, a triplet consists of three notes.  For me, a triplet consists
> of a single note, three of which make up a triplet group.

let me add to the confusion: for me a triplet is a group of more than
one notes with notated/actual duration ratio 3/2 and with a not quite
arbitrary internal metric structure, i.e. I'd beam (if we had)
\tuplet 3/2 { c8. c16 c8 } \tuplet 6/4 { c8. c16 c8 }
as
________   ________
|  _|  |   |   |_ |
|.  |  |   |.  |  |

(ugh, I hope ascii art comes through).

p

[dak, 2013-01-30 11:00:24]

Integrate further suggestions from Keith

[dak, 2013-01-30 11:32:37]

On 2013/01/30 10:41:50, dak wrote:
> We have a fundamental difference in our terminology.
> 
> For you, a triplet consists of three notes.  For me, a triplet consists of a
> single note, three of which make up a triplet group.

I've mostly skirted the issue in the current wording.

[Trevor Daniels, 2013-01-30 11:48:36]

On 2013/01/30 11:32:37, dak wrote:
> On 2013/01/30 10:41:50, dak wrote:
> > We have a fundamental difference in our terminology.
> > 
> > For you, a triplet consists of three notes.  For me, a triplet consists of a
> > single note, three of which make up a triplet group.
> 
> I've mostly skirted the issue in the current wording.

For me, too, a triplet consists of three notes.  That also
seems to be the understanding of the Wikipedia entry for
tuplet:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuplet

We could use the terms "tuplet group" and "tuplet note"
to avoid any misunderstanding, but, as you say, the text
in this patch is cleverly ambivalent, so
LGTM.

Trevor

[Keith, 2013-01-30 18:45:04]

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 02:41:50 -0800, <dak@gnu.org> wrote:

> For you, a triplet consists of three notes.  For me, a triplet consists
> of a single note, three of which make up a triplet group.

> The Wikipedia entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuplet oscillates
> between both uses, mathematically of course a triplet is a group.
>

The difficulty is that 'tuplet' can be an adjective in 'tuplet quarter note'.

The German http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notenwert#Triole
is more helpful: A 'Triole' is a group of (e.g.) three equal-length notes
immediately following one another, that has total duration of only two such
note-values.
And the grammar makes clear when Triolen is an adjective.  Vierteltriole is the
group, Triolen-Viertel is one quarter note in the group.

The text in the patch is still perfectly clear.