On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 08:17:23 +0100 "Trevor Daniels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Graham Percival wrote Sunday, July 20, 2008 11:42 PM > > > If we hadn't used "fundamental" already, I might suggest that. > > "Basic notation" implies easy stuff, not to mention the fact that > > it was used as such in the 2.10 docs. > > We'll have to find something - the section is certainly > not Input syntax! > > How about > > Further notation > General notation > Non-musical notation Well, it /was/ called "non-musical notation" before we started GDP. I'm not saying that we can't go back to it, though. I'd say either "General notation" or "Non-musical notation", leaning slightly towards the former. Anybody else have thoughts on this? Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
