>> However none of the staff types dan suggested will do what I could
>> previously do. Gregorian divisiones not supported on modern staffs
>> is a reasonable closure for this as a bug however I've previously
>> been able to use the gregorian divisions on a 'normal staff' so
>> from my pov this is a regression.
>
> Does either of these suit your purpose? [...]
The whole issue probably warrants an improvement of the documentation,
helping users in the transition to the new syntax.
Grant, assuming that Dan's code in his last reply fits your needs, can
you suggest a better wording (in the 'v2.25' documentation)?
Werner
