James E. Bailey wrote Monday, October 13, 2008 2:57 PM
On 13.10.2008, at 12:33, Trevor Daniels wrote:
Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems NR 1.6 Staff notation has
never been announced as ready for public review, although it seems to be
in good shape (thanks to Till) and has been reviewed by members of the
GDP team. So I'll do it now.
Could all of you will a few minutes to spare please look through this
section at
http://kainhofer.com/~lilypond/Documentation/user/lilypond/Staff-notation.html#Staff-notation
and post any comments, corrections or criticism to this list. Thanks.
Trevor
1) 1.6 Why doesn't the headword show something really specific to staff
notation? ( ossia, cut-out score, tab/rhythm/drum staff?)
I agree it would be better if it did. Do you have any suggestions
for a replacement?
2) 1.6.1.1 Why doesn't the GregorianTranscriptionStaff make a little more
obvious that bar lines aren't shown? 4/4 time signature with maybe, 6
quarter notes instead of just 4, so we see that there's no bar line.
OK; done.
3) 1.6.2.1 Everything before \startStaff & \stopStaff seems like stuff
from 5.3 (modifying properties). And it seems like the whole section is
there to introduce \stopStaff \startStaff
I agree. I'll look at moving it there. In general we
try to avoid explicit \overrides in Chapter 1, but I
might leave a few of the more useful ones there, perhaps
as snippets.
Trevor
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
