2007/9/14, Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > o 1.7 Educational use (or "increasing readibility" ?)
> They make the music easier to read. Again, I'm not wild about the > section name, as you can tell from the (?) in the name. > I'm quite happy with having a section that includes those subsections, > but I'm seriously stumped as to what to call it. Some time ago, I had proposed "Special effects", which was both fun and attractive -- John seemed to like it. However, "Educational use" is absolutely fine. I've seen many reactions here, these past few days, which I honestly couldn't understand at all (when people ranted against such terms as "decorating", "educational", or Rune's idea of a funny, childish logo). I mean: come on! Wasn't any of you guys a kid once? Why should music be *serious*stuff, and nothing else? Let me rephrase: LilyPond *is* perfect for educational purposes. Face it, once and for all. Playing with noteheads, staves appearance etc is *great* for having fun when reading music, learning solfege, etc. I'm speaking as a teacher (I work with both kids and grown-ups, sometimes in the same room at the same time), but also as a former kid myself. Sure, these notation effects are not reserved to education, as you said Eyolf. You use some of them in your book, so do I in my opera, and so on. But I think this would be a mistake to somehow hide the wonderful educational resources of LilyPond, and I surely hope that nobody here is trying to. Just some thoughts that I wanted to share with you. Regards, Valentin _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
