LGTM
https://codereview.appspot.com/8384043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On 2013/04/10 07:06:47, dak wrote:
On 2013/04/10 06:50:59, janek wrote:
Hmm, so i'd have to ref Single-staff polyphony
which is a @node?
Texinfo comes with a manual. You can either reference
a @node or an @anchor.
Indeed, there's something about this in
nearly there
https://codereview.appspot.com/8384043/diff/23001/Documentation/notation/vocal.itely
File Documentation/notation/vocal.itely (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/8384043/diff/23001/Documentation/notation/vocal.itely#newcode1641
Documentation/notation/vocal.itely:1641: @emph
bang.
that's why i don't like writing docs - i don't remember the syntax :)
I wonder if it would be easier if we were using some wiki - this was a
simple doc addition and it took me about an hour to do all the
maintenance...
On 2013/04/10 10:45:29, janek wrote:
bang.
that's why i don't like writing docs - i don't remember the syntax :)
I wonder if it would be easier if we were using some wiki - this was a
simple
doc addition and it took me about an hour to do all the maintenance...
You _are_ aware that a
2013/4/10 d...@gnu.org:
On 2013/04/10 10:45:29, janek wrote:
bang.
that's why i don't like writing docs - i don't remember the syntax :)
You _are_ aware that a simple make will check the Texinfo syntax of
the docs, just not the syntax of any embedded LilyPond example?
No, i wasn't - silly
that's why i don't like writing docs - i don't remember the syntax
:)
Tsk tsk tsk.
I wonder if it would be easier if we were using some wiki - this was
a simple doc addition and it took me about an hour to do all the
maintenance...
And you think that wrong Wiki syntax (which you
2013/4/10 Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org:
that's why i don't like writing docs - i don't remember the syntax
:)
Tsk tsk tsk.
I wonder if it would be easier if we were using some wiki - this was
a simple doc addition and it took me about an hour to do all the
maintenance...
And you think
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
2013/4/10 Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org:
that's why i don't like writing docs - i don't remember the syntax
:)
Tsk tsk tsk.
I wonder if it would be easier if we were using some wiki - this was
a simple doc addition and it took me about an hour
But when i'm editing Wikipedia, i have syntax buttons next to me,
and i can preview changes without waiting more than a few seconds.
As David has said, makeinfo called via `make' does the syntax checks
for you, and with the `info' program (or the Emacs editor) you can see
the resulting changes
2013/4/10 David Kastrup d...@gnu.org
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
Of course not! But when i'm editing Wikipedia, i have syntax buttons
next to me, and i can preview changes without waiting more than a few
seconds.
Maybe you should try using Emacs as an editor. It has
Changed as suggested.
Janek
https://codereview.appspot.com/8384043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/vocal.itely
File Documentation/notation/vocal.itely (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/8384043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/vocal.itely#newcode1632
Documentation/notation/vocal.itely:1632:
A couple of minor suggestions, otherwise LGTM
Thanks, Janek!
Trevor
https://codereview.appspot.com/8384043/diff/10001/Documentation/notation/vocal.itely
File Documentation/notation/vocal.itely (right):
done.
https://codereview.appspot.com/8384043/diff/10001/Documentation/notation/vocal.itely
File Documentation/notation/vocal.itely (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/8384043/diff/10001/Documentation/notation/vocal.itely#newcode1632
Documentation/notation/vocal.itely:1632: cadence, or a
fails make
https://codereview.appspot.com/8384043/diff/15001/Documentation/notation/vocal.itely
File Documentation/notation/vocal.itely (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/8384043/diff/15001/Documentation/notation/vocal.itely#newcode1641
Documentation/notation/vocal.itely:1641:
The section at 1.5.2 on Single-staff polyphony
forms a unified whole and needs to remain as it is.
However, I'd be happy to see the first paragraph
of the patch inserted at the end of Divisi lyrics
in 2.1.2 followed by a reference to the appropriate
section in 1.5.2. It is important that
A proposal: given that no other section of 1.5.2 mentions lyrics,
perhaps using my submission (or the original at 1.5.2) for temporary
polyphonic context at 2.1.2 is a better option, with a link at 1.5.2 to
2.1.2? Anyone setting multi-voice music and using the examples at 1.5.2
can easily use the
Typo
https://codereview.appspot.com/8384043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/vocal.itely
File Documentation/notation/vocal.itely (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/8384043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/vocal.itely#newcode1637
Documentation/notation/vocal.itely:1637: contexts} which will
https://codereview.appspot.com/8384043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/vocal.itely
File Documentation/notation/vocal.itely (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/8384043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/vocal.itely#newcode1632
Documentation/notation/vocal.itely:1632: cadence, or a measure or two.
This expresses pretty much what already appears
under Temporary polyphonic passages in Section 1.5.2
of the NR, although using rather more words. It
should not be repeated here. By all means replace
it with a reference to the appropriate part of 1.5.2.
The reason is as usual - the NR is
20 matches
Mail list logo
