Marc, again i have some objections on wording. Let me assure you that i don't intend to pick on you! Your patches receive so much of my attention because (a) i understand them (not always the case with David's patches for example) (b) they're usually just the correct size to make a good review.
thanks for your work! :) PS i dedicate all my code reviews to Graham Percival, especially the documentation ones. http://codereview.appspot.com/6830043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely File Documentation/notation/pitches.itely (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6830043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode1156 Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:1156: Optional octavation can be obtained by enclosing the numeric I don't quite understand this "optional" thing. (maybe i don't understand this notation correctly at all?) I suppose that a parenthesized clef octavation doesn't mean that the octavation is optional (that is, it doesn't mean "you may choose to play it in this octave or another, whatever pleases you most"). I suppose that a parenthesized clef octavation means that it's just a reminder, or that the octavation number is editorial. For example, when i see a tenor part with \clef "treble_[8]", i would interpret this as "the original edition had the tenor part written in \clef "treble", but obviously the composer didn't mean it to be sung in sopranos octave, so here's a bracketed octavation to assure the reader that this part is not some crazy composer weirdness". If that's correct, i think the description should be reworded, avoiding the word "optional" altogether. Janek http://codereview.appspot.com/6830043/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel