On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:13:03 +0200
"Valentin Villenave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/4/24 Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Counter-arguments welcome for the next three or four days. :)
>
> As a lazy user, I always prefer being pointed to a specific snippet
> rather than a bunch of snippets I won't take the time to read. There's
> no way @lsr can't be more useful than @lsrdir (btw, didn't we plan to
> rename @lsrdir in @lsrtag at some point?)
a) you need to explain to every person working on the docs what
the difference is between @lsr, @lsrdir, and why @lsr isn't the
same as @lilypondfile. Not just the current GDP people, but
anybody in the future. I bet you $20 (canadian currency, not that
fake US stuff :) that we keep the two commands, some programmer
(whose time is much better spent fixing bugs) asks what the
difference is within the next two years. @rlsr is much easier to
maintain.
b) we *want* users to skim through the snippet list. LilyPond can
do things that most people never think of -- even I get surprised
from time to time when I see neat snippets. (IIRC the last time
was about a month ago)
c) if a snippet is extremely relevant, we'll include it directly
with @lilypondfile.
Basically, do you personally want to add @lsr{} to all the
@seealso sections in Text? More to the point, *why* add half a
dozen @lsr{} links that point to items already in the
@lsrdir{Text} list?
Also, remember that renamed snippets linked by @lsr{} won't produce a
build error -- in other words, we'll end up with a bunch of semi-broken
links (they'll still resolve to the Text list, just at the top of it)
without us knowing.
Everything about this screams "more trouble than it's worth" to me.
Cheers,
- Graham
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
