A new patch has been uploaded to a new issue,
number 6567059, as I do not own this one.
Werner: could you close this issue please.
http://codereview.appspot.com/6529043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
This example shows a beam extending from a stem to the
final note of the glissando. Is this correct, or would
it be better to suppress the beam?
I made some Bartók and Xenakis scans, see
https://docs.google.com/folder/d/0B7AjGy5hUKtAeWtkdHdfN0l4bm8/edit
such beams can be seen in 0162.jpeg and
Benkő Pál wrote Wednesday, September 26, 2012 1:31 PM
I made some Bartók and Xenakis scans, see
https://docs.google.com/folder/d/0B7AjGy5hUKtAeWtkdHdfN0l4bm8/edit
such beams can be seen in 0162.jpeg and 0164.jpeg
(the former has examples for avoiding such stems too, using flags).
Many
I'm reworking these examples ready for insertion in
the NR, but I'd like to see responses to my comment
below first.
Trevor
http://codereview.appspot.com/6529043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/expressive.itely
File Documentation/notation/expressive.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/6529043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/expressive.itely
File Documentation/notation/expressive.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/6529043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/expressive.itely#newcode1074
Documentation/notation/expressive.itely:1074:
http://codereview.appspot.com/6529043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/expressive.itely
File Documentation/notation/expressive.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/6529043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/expressive.itely#newcode1074
Documentation/notation/expressive.itely:1074:
One more question (sorry, I'm not familiar with
this notation, and I'd like to be sure it's right.)
Trevor
http://codereview.appspot.com/6529043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/expressive.itely
File Documentation/notation/expressive.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/6529043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/expressive.itely
File Documentation/notation/expressive.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/6529043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/expressive.itely#newcode1059
Documentation/notation/expressive.itely:1059:
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 09:05:51PM +, thomasmorle...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 2012/09/20 18:08:15, Graham Percival wrote:
We normally do not include \override in most sections of the Notation
manual.
Instead, we ask users to submit LSR snippets showing the \override,
then we
include
We normally do not include \override in most sections of the Notation
manual. Instead, we ask users to submit LSR snippets showing the
\override, then we include those snippets in the docs. This allows us
to improve the documentation with minimal effort on the part of
developers.
If there's a
Am 20.09.2012 20:08, schrieb gra...@percival-music.ca:
We normally do not include \override in most sections of the Notation
manual. Instead, we ask users to submit LSR snippets showing the
\override, then we include those snippets in the docs. This allows us
to improve the documentation with
Reviewers: Graham Percival,
Message:
I agree with your argumentation. However, I don't have time to fix the
patch. Maybe a good soul from the documentation team can improve this.
Description:
Doc: Improve documentation of \glissando.
Based on work from Tiresia GIUNO tires...@googlemail.com.
On 2012/09/20 18:08:15, Graham Percival wrote:
We normally do not include \override in most sections of the Notation
manual.
Instead, we ask users to submit LSR snippets showing the \override,
then we
include those snippets in the docs. This allows us to improve the
documentation
with
13 matches
Mail list logo
