On 24-Nov-04, at 6:27 AM, Laura Conrad wrote:
There might be better words to use than "eats".
I don't understand how FiguredBass works, but how's this?
Figured bass is created by the FiguredBass context which responds to
figured bass requests and rest-requests. You must enter these using
the special @code{\figuremode @{ @}} mode, which allows you to type
numbers, like @code{<4 6+>}."eats" -> "responds to"
If that's a better way of phrasing it, I'll commit it.
But I don't see that note-requests are being treated any differently from rest-requests. In both cases, the FiguredBass context is taking the timing values and using them to decide where to put the figures, but not otherwise displaying them. So leaving out note-requests from that sentence was really misleading, especially to someone who had read the previous version.
Umm... sorry, I'm really lost here. Should I add an extra sentence? (see below)
Figured bass is created by the FiguredBass context which responds to
figured bass requests and rest-requests. You must enter these using
the special @code{\figuremode @{ @}} mode, which allows you to type
numbers, like @code{<4 6+>}. It does not respond to note-requests.Mats> Seriously, the comments in the Regression test files have probably
Mats> been formulated mainly to be read by the LilyPond hackers. The official
Mats> documentation is in the notation manual. Of course, this is a pity,
I consider all the docs on the left-hand side of the Documentation page to be
user documentation. The NEWS and INSTALL are semi-user stuff (ie a new
user doesn't care about previous news, and is either unix-y enough to need the
instructions for compiling on NetBSD or shouldn't be reading the "compile
from source" install page).
Mats> since I find the Regression Tests document one of the best sources of
Mats> examples for LilyPond users on all levels.
I consider the examples to be part of the documentation. As do the Debian packagers, who put them in a directory called /usr/share/doc/lilypond/examples. It really wouldn't be possible to write a clear, concise manual with all the stuff you need to have a working lilypond file, and lots of us never really write all that stuff -- we either snarf one of the example files or let a converter like abc2ly write it for us.
I agree that examples are vitally important, and we should include more. But I don't consider the Regression Tests to be the best place for examples.
If there's specific wording that's confusing (such as above), I'm happy
to change it -- provided that this is ok with developers who use the
Regression Tests as actual tests -- but I think it's better to spend more
effort working on the manual. In this case, section "5.6.13 Figured
Bass"
Cheers, - Graham
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
