On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 23:52:25 +0100 "Trevor Daniels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The latest draft of the proposed section headings for the > reorganisation of NR 2 is now posted on > http://web.uvic.ca/~gperciva/NR2-draft.txt , labelled Draft 5. Where do all the "for fingerings, see @ref{fingers}" comments go? If they're in the NR 2.x or NR 2.x.y level, then we'll probably get approximately two people each year asking questions on -user who didn't notice them. This might be acceptable, especially since these sections are mainly pointing at previous material in the docs. If you create new @subsubsections just for the "Other useful material for FOO", then that adds a whole bunch of index entries. Also, their names will be weird, since each @node name must be unique (ie you can't just add subsections called "Other info" everywhere). A third option is to vary where this material is placed -- for a large section like Vocal, add a separate @subsubsection, but for small sections like Strings, add it to the main (or in some cases, only) subsubsection. I don't have any particular opinion on which of these options are the least undesirable. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
