I'm out of time to finish this review today, so I thought it would be best to publish what I have.
My overall thought is that in the Learning Manual, we shouldn't enforce yet-to-be-explained coding standards. Instead, we ought to format the examples to do the best job possible of explaining the particular item the example is trying to explain. Later in Learning, when we talk about larger projects, we should introduce the code standards and even give a link to Contributors. In fact, I might prefer to have the coding standards mentioned in Learning and linked to from Contributors, but I'm not positive about that. Thanks, Carl http://codereview.appspot.com/1056041/diff/1/2 File Documentation/learning/common-notation.itely (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/1056041/diff/1/2#newcode101 Documentation/learning/common-notation.itely:101: aeses1 During the GDP, we established the policy that simple lines such as this could be on one line, even though they had multiple bars. Perhaps we could just change the durations in this to 4, and we wouldn't even be having a discussion. http://codereview.appspot.com/1056041/diff/1/2#newcode226 Documentation/learning/common-notation.itely:226: c4~ c8 a~ a2 I don't think a requirement to eliminate unnecessary durations is wise. Extra durations cause no problem at all, and may even make the music more readable. Making sure we have a minimum set of specified durations (start of measure or start of line) makes sense to me. http://codereview.appspot.com/1056041/diff/1/2#newcode253 Documentation/learning/common-notation.itely:253: b'2 a4 cis,\) Add bar check, IMO. In terms of the core concept for this snippet, the slur and the phrasing slur, I think the original snippet shows the structure more clearly, with the () nested inside the \( \). So on a strictly pedagogical basis, I would tend to violate the general code formatting rules for this case and leave it as-is. http://codereview.appspot.com/1056041/diff/1/2#newcode271 Documentation/learning/common-notation.itely:271: fis2 g) Same comment as for the previous snippet. http://codereview.appspot.com/1056041/diff/1/2#newcode299 Documentation/learning/common-notation.itely:299: c4-+ c-_ Since the objective here is to show the articulations, we may not want to worry about splitting the line. If we do want to split the line, we should find two more articulations and add them, so we get two complete bars, and put a bar check in the middle. http://codereview.appspot.com/1056041/diff/1/2#newcode365 Documentation/learning/common-notation.itely:365: c2 c\! See my comment at line 289 http://codereview.appspot.com/1056041/diff/1/2#newcode390 Documentation/learning/common-notation.itely:390: a1_"legato" Repeat of 289 http://codereview.appspot.com/1056041/diff/1/2#newcode982 Documentation/learning/common-notation.itely:982: d4 b8 g4. Bar checks here. Pedagogically, it may be nice to have the notes and the lyrics have lines of the same length. http://codereview.appspot.com/1056041/show _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
