On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 6:26 AM, Carl Sorensen <c_soren...@byu.edu> wrote:
> Thanks for your feedback. Feedback from new users is important for
> improving the Learning Manual.
>
Just so we're on the same page, I've been an occasional LilyPond user for
many many years now; I was just saying that I'm not particularly familiar
with collaboration or mailing list conventions, what your relationship is
to the project and whether you're a frequenter contributer to LilyPond or
not, etc. :-)
>
> I thought that the combination of "Ties and slurs are indicated by adding
> special codes after the notes to which they apply" and "The starting note
> [of a slur] and ending note are marked with ( and ), respectively" would
> be equivalent to the statement "Note that the ( marking the beginning of a
> slur appears after the first note of the slur". And the "Note that ( and )
> do not enclose the notes of the slur" was aimed at clarifying a somewhat
> common misconception.
>
> Do you think it would be better to eliminate the "Ties and slurs are
> indicated by adding special codes after the notes to which they apply" and
> just say about slurs:
> "The starting note and ending note are marked with ( and ),
> respectively. Note that the ( marking the beginning of the slur appears
> after the first note of the slur."
>
That sounds good to me.
In case it's not clear, my pseudo-objection to the wording
+Note that @code{[} and @code{]} do not enclose the notes to be
+slurred.
is that the ( and ) literally *do* enclose the notes that are slurred,
except for the first. I get that the intent seems somehow different between
'a( b c)' and '(a b c)' in terms of what the parens mean, but the 'b' and
'c' still are enclosed by the parens even in the LilyPond syntax.
Evan
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
