Re: review new info on file layout

Quoting Graham Percival <gpermus <at> gmail.com>:

>
> On 4-Feb-06, at 1:59 AM, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
>
>> Quoting Erik Sandberg <erik.sandberg.9195 <at> student.uu.se>:
>>> Then I'd propose this instead:
>>> \new Lyrics { \lyricsto mytune { ... } }
>>> because it feels relevant to me to consequently create contexts as 
>>> top-level
>>> as possible. (hm.. the outer {} in my example are still confusing though,
>>> since lyricsto never can be part of anything sequential)
>
> I agree with Erik -- now the highest view of the music expression is
> {
>   \new Staff { vocal }
>   \new Lyrics \lyricsto vocalstaff { \lyrics }
>   \new PianoStaff
> }
>
> correct?  And I should change the vocal templates to match this?

Fine with me!
> ...

>>> I think the shorthand without score is highly relevant:
>>> - Lots of music is just short snippets. See e.g. regression tests, 
>>> LSR and bug archive.
>>
>> That's only true for the small group of people like you and me who
>> spend more time answering mailing list questions and handling bug
>> reports than on typesetting any real music. It's clearly a suboptimization
>> to adapt the syntax too much to such unnormal use of the program.
>
> Yes, but it also applies to the manual.  We already explain that 
> examples from the manual need {} or even \relative c' { }   to 
> compile.

Exactly! One of the most common newbie complaints about the manual is 
that the examples don't show all the details you need in a real score.

    /Mats