On 4/25/18, 12:16 PM, "Robert Hickman" <robehick...@gmail.com> wrote:
It is quite apparent that this wasn't written for random access and I
feel that websites are much more effective and user friendly if they
are.
As we try to make clear, the Learning Manual is intentionally not built for
random access. The Notation Reference *is* built for random access.
Experience in the past showed that there is a minimum set of information that
you need to have before you can make enough sense of LilyPond to have the
random access part be meaningful. If you don't have the basic concepts, you
don't know how to even ask the right questions.
Once the Learning Manual was created (not by me, I might add), and we
established a policy of asking everybody who gets started with LilyPond to read
through the Learning Manual sequentially, the quality of the questions on
lilypond-user went up dramatically, and the user list became a much better
place to get help.
Another specific documentation design decision is that we do not describe the
examples in the text preceding the example. You must look at the example input
code and the example output to really understand what is going on. This is a
conscious choice to keep the documentation shorter than it otherwise would be.
It requires the reader to look at the example input code and think about it as
it relates to the output. But it actually helps reduce "cargo-cult" LilyPond
programming and helps readers really gain their own understanding.
I don't see us doing away with the expectation of beginners reading the
Learning Manual, but as Kieren said, if you'd like to contribute links that you
think would help your understanding, we'd be happy to accept your contributions.
Thanks,
Carl
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
