Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx1...@gmail.com)
On 2017/09/24 15:34:15, Jean-Charles wrote: On 2017/09/24 14:20:08, pkx166h wrote: > Corrected the Note styles. Added more formatting changes. Would you mind formatting the "Standard clefs" as well, which would then "group" G, C and F-clefs and have a more pleasant layout? Pas de problème! https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx1...@gmail.com)
On 2017/09/24 18:02:11, benko.pal wrote: Hello James, > I took a bit of time to educate myself with Ancient notation and have, > hopefully, picked the correct note styles now. > > Should I use the red 4-line-staff for the rest of the examples or just > for the Gregorian clefs? Just for the Gregorian clefs. Mensural clefs, as the C-clefs witness, assume five line staves. > https://cloud.woelkli.com/s/dBGXat0NEGVoy5C The modified link is almost perfect, just two nits to pick: - hufnagel-do-fa is misaligned (both the c and f should be on line, as if hufnagel-do3-fa1) -- this may be a bug elsewhere. Well I wonder if it is because I used 4 lines - I have now used, as per Werner's suggestion, used 5 lines. See if this works. - petrucci-f5 is duplicated. Oh yes. Fixed. Thanks. Thanks, Pal https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx1...@gmail.com)
On 2017/09/24 14:52:07, lemzwerg wrote: > Should I use the red 4-line-staff for the rest > of the examples or just for the Gregorian clefs? Red four-line staves should be probably used for Gregorian only. However, I'm not an expert, so maybe others have a more educated opinion. Two other problems. * For Hufnagel clefs you should also use Hufnagel note heads. Thanks, now done, these are not documented (at least I could not find them) in the NR. * The hufnagel-do-fa clef doesn't make sense for four lines. Either set this clef one line lower, or use a five-line staff, cf. 5 lines it is. Thanks. http://www.schoyencollection.com/media/djcatalog2/images/hufnagel-notation-5-line-staff-ms-1589_f.jpg https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx1...@gmail.com)
Hello James, > I took a bit of time to educate myself with Ancient notation and have, > hopefully, picked the correct note styles now. > > Should I use the red 4-line-staff for the rest of the examples or just > for the Gregorian clefs? Just for the Gregorian clefs. Mensural clefs, as the C-clefs witness, assume five line staves. > https://cloud.woelkli.com/s/dBGXat0NEGVoy5C The modified link is almost perfect, just two nits to pick: - hufnagel-do-fa is misaligned (both the c and f should be on line, as if hufnagel-do3-fa1) -- this may be a bug elsewhere. - petrucci-f5 is duplicated. Thanks, Pal ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx1...@gmail.com)
On 2017/09/24 14:20:08, pkx166h wrote: Corrected the Note styles. Added more formatting changes. Would you mind formatting the "Standard clefs" as well, which would then "group" G, C and F-clefs and have a more pleasant layout? https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx1...@gmail.com)
Should I use the red 4-line-staff for the rest of the examples or just for the Gregorian clefs? Red four-line staves should be probably used for Gregorian only. However, I'm not an expert, so maybe others have a more educated opinion. Two other problems. * For Hufnagel clefs you should also use Hufnagel note heads. * The hufnagel-do-fa clef doesn't make sense for four lines. Either set this clef one line lower, or use a five-line staff, cf. http://www.schoyencollection.com/media/djcatalog2/images/hufnagel-notation-5-line-staff-ms-1589_f.jpg https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx1...@gmail.com)
On 2017/09/24 14:27:05, pkx166h wrote: @Phil @Benko I took a bit of time to educate myself with Ancient notation and have, hopefully, picked the correct note styles now. Should I use the red 4-line-staff for the rest of the examples or just for the Gregorian clefs? https://cloud.woelkli.com/s/RohlvM7Gcj5G0yy (new link) This is a 300kb PDF of the Ancient Clefs as they will appear in the notation appendix. https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx1...@gmail.com)
> https://cloud.woelkli.com/s/dBGXat0NEGVoy5C This link doesn't work (`Invalid PDF structure'). Werner ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx1...@gmail.com)
@Phil @Benko
I took a bit of time to educate myself with Ancient notation and have,
hopefully, picked the correct note styles now.
Should I use the red 4-line-staff for the rest of the examples or just
for the Gregorian clefs?
https://cloud.woelkli.com/s/dBGXat0NEGVoy5C
This is a 300kb PDF of the Ancient Clefs as they will appear in the
notation appendix.
https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/diff/40001/Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely
File Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely (left):
https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/diff/40001/Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely#oldcode1484
Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely:1484:
@lilypond[line-width=3\cm,notime,ragged-right,relative=1]
On 2017/09/12 14:47:04, pkx166h wrote:
Note to self - this @item needs to be an @tab
Done.
https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/diff/40001/Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely
File Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/diff/40001/Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely#newcode1542
Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely:1542: @code{\clef
varpercussion}
On 2017/09/12 14:47:04, pkx166h wrote:
Note to self - this @item needs to be an @tab
Done.
https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx1...@gmail.com)
Note to self.
https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/diff/40001/Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely
File Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely (left):
https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/diff/40001/Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely#oldcode1484
Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely:1484:
@lilypond[line-width=3\cm,notime,ragged-right,relative=1]
Note to self - this @item needs to be an @tab
https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/diff/40001/Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely
File Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/diff/40001/Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely#newcode1542
Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely:1542: @code{\clef
varpercussion}
Note to self - this @item needs to be an @tab
https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
